This being the poster in question, an ad poster on the London Underground for some type of diet supplement, for those who don’t trust me not to link you to goatse it’s a young woman with standard supermodel physique with the words “ARE YOU BEACH BODY READY?” next to her.
The Mayor of London has said that it’s body shaming and has to go, others say that removing it is ridiculous if the ad’s space has been paid for. If you were in charge, would you give it the OK?
It would be “body shaming” if the poster showed a fat slob with the tag line “Don’t show up on the beach if you look like this”.
A reason to ban the poster is that it promotes what almost certainly is a phony weight-loss supplement.
Guess the Brits have a problem like ours when it comes to (not) regulating this crap.*
*and a Prince of Wales who promotes supplement glurge, including homeopathy.
The link doesn’t work for me but I don’t even need to see it to vote “let it stay”. How this differs from the hundreds of similar ads everyone - including Londoners- is exposed to every day I don’t know. With all the current problems in London I’d think the mayor would have more important things to do than tilt at this imaginary windmill.
This is a rehash of the same issue with the same ad from last year.
I think it’s horrible and am all for people complaining about it - and indeed am all for TfL/London Underground taking them down if a sufficient volume of complaints were received and considered valid - but I can’t think of a reason to formally legislate against this. Any such laws will either be useless, require convoluted regulations and implementation, or be so overly restrictive that you end up banning any ads showing people at all.
I have to say, Khan has managed to become a massive disappointment very quickly (not specifically for this but mainly because he’s still going ahead with that fucking garden bridge). Still better than Goldsmith though.
If they suddenly can’t use sexy ladies in ads to sell shit, Madison Avenue (and the London equivalent) will close down in about two weeks.
Nothing wrong with using sexy ladies in ads. The problem with this one is that it implies the only way a woman should go to the beach is if she’s super-sexy.
Basically, it’s an epitomisation of the widespread belief that women’s bodies exist for other people’s pleasure, not for the women’s own. So for a woman, being ‘ready for the beach’ doesn’t mean ‘ready to enjoy the beach’, it means ‘ready for other people to enjoy you’.
They used the same ad a summer or two ago and got a lot of disgust and online controversy and plenty of attention, so they’re doing it again for more attention. Surprise.
That color scheme in and of itself is grounds for banning it.
I’ll admit that it’s not a realistic goal for the vast majority of women- age and body shape an lifestyle have to align just right to get that sort of physique. Same goes for the male equivalent- most men aren’t bulked up enough/willing enough to use steroids, nor do they have such a tiny body fat percentage as to be that ripped.
But the girl on the poster is presented as the ideal, not a realistic goal. Similarly, being built like Chris Pratt in “Guardians of the Galaxy” or Channing Tatum in “Magic Mike” is more of an ideal, and not something realistic. Hell, Pratt and Tatum don’t even look like that if left to their own devices. Both guys seem to bitch an awful lot about how much of a PITA it is to eat and work out like that- they prefer cheeseburgers and not working out hours each day… which isn’t shocking at all.
As far as the actual image of the girl goes; nothing special there- it’s not overly revealing nor overly skimpy (unlike the Hannah Davis SI cover, where there had to have been shaving/waxing and retouching done).
Coddling people’s self-esteem over their body image is bullshit. In the USA, most people are fat, critically fat enough to take a decade or so off their lives. and all they need to do is stop packing their bodies full of junk food. It doesn’t work to try to scare the hell out of fatsos by telling them the fat will kill them, but they do pay attention if you tell them they’re ugly. Hit 'em where it hurts, where it pisses them off, it’s the only way they will pay attention.
Wait til London has as many grotesquely fat waddling gargoyles as America does. And it’s too late. And now we want laws to prohibit warning them?
This. Other than that, it doesn’t look meaningfully different than the thousands of other ads peddling beauty/fitness shit.
[QUOTE=eclectic wench]
Basically, it’s an epitomisation of the widespread belief that women’s bodies exist for other people’s pleasure, not for the women’s own. So for a woman, being ‘ready for the beach’ doesn’t mean ‘ready to enjoy the beach’, it means ‘ready for other people to enjoy you’.
[/QUOTE]
So is every ad targeted toward women throughout human history, though. I don’t see what makes it stand out as particularly odious.
And I think it’s kind of lame to ban things we find culturally problematic. Instead we should change the culture that makes advertisements like that effective.
Its definitely body shaming, a bit subtle, but unmistakable if you just give it a second thought. However, I’m not sure if body shaming to a small degree isn’t in the public interest
It’s perfectly fine.
I know body image/shaming is a problem but other than doing away with 50% of the pictures out there I don’t know that we could prevent it. Compared to many I see this one ain’t all that bad.
A hot girl used to sell products. How unorthodox. Never been done before. Leave it be. :dubious:
My first thought. The woman is in monochrome, except for her bikini, and the almost exclusive use of the color yellow is overwhelming.
This is a decent point well explained, but, in fairness, there are plenty of men as well as women who would feel better about going shirtless in public (i.e. on the beach) if they got in shape first.
In the grand scheme of things, far too many people expend far too much energy worrying about what others think of them, or judging others for things that are none of their business. I doubt it’ll ever change because that’s just the way people are.
Personally, I have no problem with using an attractive person to sell a product. It’s business - you want to catch attention and make a good impression. What bothers me is the notion that one must aspire to be like the air-brushed models in ads in order to be a worthy human being, or that one who doesn’t meet whatever criteria I deem important is, by definition, a lazy, slovenly, stupid, ugly gargoyle. You may not like the way I look. I may not like the way you look. That’s life. Who cares?
Obviously some people do, and they often try to achieve an unrealistic ideal, to their detriment, physically and emotionally. Sometimes. we’ve pathetic creatures.
Perhaps there can be a compromise ad suggesting masturbation?
There is that, and also the fact that absolutely no one is going to lose an ounce using whatever snake oil that ad is peddling.
The ad is fine, I mean, aside from the fact that you’re not going to attain that body by taking pills. I don’t agree that it’s body shaming.
