# Homoerotic Advertising from WWII era **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [May 15, 2006, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837 "2006-05-15T15:43:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/1 "2006-05-15T15:43:15Z")
Apparently Cannon towels were sending tons of towels to the soldiers and wanted to let the little ladies back home know that was why they were seeing possible shortages in the stores. The art, appearing in _Life_ magazine, they used is, how shall we say, interesting: [Army Day – Crocodiles Keep Out!](http://www.commercialcloset.org/cgi-bin/iowa/portrayals.html?record=1002) from _Life_ magazine. The [Tank Corps](http://www.commercialcloset.org/cgi-bin/iowa/portrayals.html?record=1001) have got a little bit of Roman Orgy look goin’ on. I must say a [Buna Bathtub](http://www.commercialcloset.org/cgi-bin/iowa/portrayals.html?record=1003) is certainly a novel use for a canoe. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/2 "2006-05-15T16:34:28Z")
While I won’t argue that these ads appear to be homoerotic you have to remember that these ads ran in the states. I think you could say that the target audience was the loney women shose men were overseas. Think of it as Chippendales circa 1942. ---
**Author:** ![A.R.Cane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee7513/32.png) [@A.R.Cane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A.R.Cane)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/3 "2006-05-15T16:44:00Z")
I agree w/ Rick. Homosexuality just wasn’t the issue, back then, that it is now. Your links brought back a memory of another print ad, that I think appeared in the years after the war. I believe it was also a Cannon ad, it depicted an indian male in loincloth w/ the caption, “A buck well spent on Cannon sheets”. Seems that Cannons advertising found the “beefcake” ads successful. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/4 "2006-05-15T17:13:55Z")
“…but whatta bath, brother, _whatta bath!_” And what’s up with that guy holding and washing a dismembered leg in the “…Alligators Keep Out!” ad? Does this GI have serious battle fatigue? Perhaps he’s lovingly washing his dead buddy’s blown apart body parts? “Say! it looks like Joe’s gone crackers, fellas! (and how, brother!) Sure does miss his pal a lot!” (“Joe’s” in the foreground on the left with his back turned.) ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/5 "2006-05-15T17:15:25Z")
Yeah, there couldn’t possibly be any homoeroticism in those ads, what with the advertising industry being notoriously free of homosexuals… ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/6 "2006-05-15T17:16:26Z")
oops… I mean crocodiles. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/7 "2006-05-15T17:22:11Z")
You can read whatever you want into the ads, but, at the time – no, there was no homoeroticism going on. Granted, homosexuals of the time might read it that way, but they also read that Batman and Robin were gay: mere projection. Indeed, calling these ads homoerotic is more about the person giving them the label than the ads themselves. Back in the 40s, such things had absolutely no gay implications to all but a handful of the population. Today, of course, people would look at it differently, but not then. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/8 "2006-05-15T17:23:18Z")
nope, there are absolutely no homosexual crocodiles in the advertising industry… ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/9 "2006-05-15T17:24:03Z")
> [@A.R. Cane](#): > > I agree w/ Rick. Homosexuality just wasn’t the issue, back then, that it is now. Your links brought back a memory of another print ad, that I think appeared in the years after the war. I believe it was also a Cannon ad, it depicted an indian male in loincloth w/ the caption, “A buck well spent on Cannon sheets”. Seems that Cannons advertising found the “beefcake” ads successful. [Springmaid](http://www.snopes.com/business/market/springmaid.asp). ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/10 "2006-05-15T17:38:28Z")
Sure. Homoeroticism was completely absent before, what, 1969?. And Walt Whitman was celebate and only praising platonic love between men. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/11 "2006-05-15T18:02:31Z")
Well, considering the results of [this poll,](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=371248) I don’t see why they can’t be homoerotic AND aimed at women! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/12 "2006-05-15T18:11:54Z")
I wonder how many of the posters calling this “homoerotic” are also the ones who said they were afraid to shower at the gym. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/13 "2006-05-15T18:18:26Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > I wonder how many of the posters calling this “homoerotic” are also the ones who said they were afraid to shower at the gym. I’m not quite sure what you mean. Are you suggesting that I see homoeroticism here because I find naked men bathing together erotic. Likewise I was afraid to take showers in school because I was afraid I’d find my classmates showering together erotic and would expose myself to ridicule and abuse because of my boner in the shower? Is that what you’re trying to say? Is it? Yep, that’s a fair cop. That really is why I didn’t take showers in gym class in junior high. Guilty. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/14 "2006-05-15T18:23:15Z")
Say what you like, but that guy with the palm frond in the third picture is gayer than Nathan Lane. I think it might actually defy the laws of physics for a straight guy to stand in that pose. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![A.R.Cane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee7513/32.png) [@A.R.Cane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A.R.Cane)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/15 "2006-05-15T18:47:37Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > [Springmaid](http://www.snopes.com/business/market/springmaid.asp). That’s the one. Thanks for the correction. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/16 "2006-05-15T18:56:05Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > Sure. Homoeroticism was completely absent before, what, 1969?. And Walt Whitman was celebate and only praising platonic love between men. Not what I’m saying. I’m saying there was no _intentional_ homoeroticism in these images. As is often the case, you’re assuming that the people creating the art (including Walt Whitman) lived in 2006. You cannot assume that people in the past thought the same way as we do. That’s always a mistake. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/17 "2006-05-15T19:07:23Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > Not what I’m saying. I’m saying there was no _intentional_ homoeroticism in these images. > > As is often the case, you’re assuming that the people creating the art (including Walt Whitman) lived in 2006. You cannot assume that people in the past thought the same way as we do. That’s always a mistake. Heh, I don’t fully buy it. Sure, attitudes have changed with the times - but this image: [http://www.commercialcloset.org/cgi-bin/iowa/portrayals.html?record=1003](http://www.commercialcloset.org/cgi-bin/iowa/portrayals.html?record=1003) seems to deliberately flirt with gay themes - the guy with the palm frond is definitely parodying a “striptease” pose while making eyes at the guy beside him, the guy on the right is whistling at him - while in the middle a guy is washing another’s hair. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/18 "2006-05-15T19:15:23Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > Not what I’m saying. I’m saying there was no _intentional_ homoeroticism in these images. I dunno. I’m usually all for the general point being made. For example, I’ll argue extensively that there’s no homoerotic subtext in LOTR between Sam and Frodo, and that those who see one are reading their own proclivities into a relationship which is clearly something different. But those pictures? I’m frankly not sure how they could be any more homoerotic short of graphically depicting hot steamy man-sex. Just for the record, and to answer **saoirse** , I’ve never found naked men or pictures thereof (including these) arousing in the least. I’m not saying there’s homoeroticism there because I find the pictures erotic. I’m saying it’s there because the men in the picture are clearly enjoying the view. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/19 "2006-05-15T19:23:20Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > Not what I’m saying. I’m saying there was no _intentional_ homoeroticism in these images. What makes you so sure? Do you suggest there were no homosexuals then? Do you think that Doris Day’s line to her boss in _Lover Come Back_ concerning his decorating tastes isn’t a sly nod to his being “artistic”? Did you miss the two women dressed more like men than women in 1958’s _Auntie Mame_? The villans in _Rope_ (1948; Alfred Hitchcock) were just good friends, right? > [@](#): > > As is often the case, you’re assuming that the people creating the art (including Walt Whitman) lived in 2006. You cannot assume that people in the past thought the same way as we do. That’s always a mistake. You’re absolutely wrong. Walt Whitman made no bones about being homosexual. Gore Vidal has said explicity that he and director William Wyler discussed having homosexual undertones to the relationship between Messala and Judah Ben-Hur for the 1959 film. You are fooling yourself if you think the artists involved in these didn’t see the homoeroticism themselves. As your own references to the Springmaid ad show, sexual double entendres were not uncommon then. ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837/20 "2006-05-15T19:24:14Z")
I think the pictures are hot. What? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homoerotic-advertising-from-wwii-era/356837.md?page=2)