When I leave work to go home, I catch the bus at the corner of Spring Garden and Summer, by the Public Gardens. For the last few weeks there has been the ‘DO ME a favour’ ad on the bus stop shelter. I am not the target market, but I get it (and the ‘TAKE your hands off ME’ ad). Recently, there is a new ad, advertising a line of clothing an upscale Spring Garden store. The woman in the ad is pretty scantily clad – a lace bra that doesn’t leave too much to the imagination, leather pants, neck choke collar and suspenders suggestive of SandM. So I ask you. How are we ever going to make a difference with ‘DO ME, TAKE ME, don’t be that guy’ campaigns when the very next ad in that space is a woman who most definitely looks like she is saying DO ME, etc? The store is owned by four well educated professional women who I would have hoped could look at other ways to sell their clothing. That ad does not speak to me – a professional woman with a certain amount of disposable income who is not now less inclined to spend it at that store. They can do better, we can all do better and we must for girls and young women. —Concerned professional woman
This article appears in Sep 19-25, 2013.
This is a very good point OP. Society is encouraged not to ‘slut shame’ while at the same time reprimanded for encouraging ads such as this. Seems a little confusing.
Seems to fall in line with the bonehead who thought “Do it on the bus” was appropriate as well.
Good point Klyde – we should ban any kind of sexually suggestive images/slogans from public places.
My question is this – do women have the right to feel sexy when she’s with a person she likes? Does she sometimes want to wear things like this? The answer to these questions, unless you’ve only ever been with some seriously old-fashioned women, is yes. Obviously marketing companies are aware of this and those are the people they are marketing to. They are selling something relevant to sex, why wouldn’t they use sexual imagery/slogans? It would be different if they were selling, I don’t know, milk…or yes, even public transportation. Albeit the line “TAKE your hands off ME” is going a bit far as it alludes to the woman not wanting to be in a sexual scenario. However, if the company is selling langerie, what’s wrong with showing a model wearing their product with a slogan saying “Do me a favour”? There are also ads directed at men for, say, Calvin Klein underwear or body spray that sexualize men to sell their products, should these be banned as well?
Here it comes…
You make good points too Hoist. Problem is it’s there for all to see…. all ages.
How much do you want to bet the model probably wasn’t even of legal age?
as hoist said, if the store is selling lingerie, leather pants and slave collars then the ad is legit.
(those ck ads have GOT to be aimed at m2m)
and those ‘do me’ ads are one of the worst and ill conceived wastes of taxpayers’ money.
Jesus. The ‘do me’ ads were DESIGNED to be controversial. Ever think they were made that way on purpose?
Every time someone says those ads are a waste of tax payer’s money just reinforces the fact that the ad worked. An ad that was tame, not controversial and unnoticeable would be the real waste of taxpayers money, since there would be no discussion to be had from them.
yup, the ads were designed to be controversial. wowie. how about effective? who is the target for the ads? guys who think no means kick her in the teeth. or guys who think snoring says yessssssssssssssssssss.
they are NOT going to get the proverbial lightbulb blaze into sensitive sentience over their noggins upon seeing the small print. those guys are going to gleefully sharpie in rude comments, make up snappy jingles around the words.
advertising is supposed to sway/influence your target market. this just feeds the assholes some funny lines.
so what if the ‘already converted’ find it interesting to talk about? big deal.
Molly, when you formulate a thought, do you just smash the keyboard with your face?
Here’s the thing op. These ads are selling lingerie.
How do you recommend they do that?
“So I ask you. How are we ever going to make a difference with ‘DO ME, TAKE ME, don’t be that guy’ campaigns when the very next ad in that space is a woman who most definitely looks like she is saying DO ME, etc?”
um… because I can look at a woman in an poster ad (or real life) dressed sexy and still not get all rapey. Places where such posters are outlawed and women aren’t allowed to show any skin in public have, and correct me if I’m wrong here, a bigger sexual violence problem than our part of the world.
A woman saying “hey look at me I’m sexy in this outfit” doesn’t negate the fact that no means no. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.. is that so difficult to wrap your head around?