Over the bikini line! 'Offensive and highly sexualised' Femfresh advert with dancers in skimpy swimwear is BANNED 'for objectifying women'

eddie wrote:Yeah it was all bit fannified.

I hate adverts. Let's take this one for an example. It tells us their product "reduces razor bumps and redness" but we all know that those woman didn't just shave their muffs and then go and make that video.
It's just a pack of lies. Like the make up removers or creams for skin; close-up of a woman in full make-up (the kind of make-up that looks like they have none on ) rubbing absolutely nothing on her skin!!

Why don't that fuck off? We are not stupid!

Or the adverts that tell you their new line of whatever is the "best yet" and still sell their old line of whatever. If they're saying the new one is the best why are they still selling their old shit?

Angry Andy wrote:Why do feminine sanitary adverts always feature blue liquid to represent period blood or discharge. What is wrong with the colour red?

Syl wrote:Just watched the ad....I imagine it'll appeal more to men than women.
Would I fall for the stuff they sell...nope.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:Just watched the ad....I imagine it'll appeal more to men than women.
Would I fall for the stuff they sell...nope.

Nature has manipulated male and female psychology rather nicely: men desire sex directly, while women desire to be desired.  You can see the long-term reach of both...women, after all, will end up getting pregnant.

The female eroticism (which is what the advertisers are selling) is much more cerebral and interactive...that's why men's porn  is straight pictures, while women's porn is in the form of (relatively) more complex romance novels.  That's also why women buy perfumes, make-up and clothes that show off the cleavage...they are not simply going after genitalia, but a role in their own attraction.

The point is to always play to these two motives.  One will be the other; and vice-versa.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Nature has manipulated male and female psychology rather nicely: men desire sex directly, while women desire to be desired.  You can see the long-term reach of both...women, after all, will end up getting pregnant.

The female eroticism (which is what the advertisers are selling) is much more cerebral and interactive...that's why men's porn  is straight pictures, while women's porn is in the form of (relatively) more complex romance novels.  That's also why women buy perfumes, make-up and clothes that show off the cleavage...they are not simply going after genitalia, but a role in their own attraction.

The point is to always play to these two motives.  One will be the other; and vice-versa.

I get a lot of what you are saying, apart from...and we have had a similar debate before..
Women (like me for instance) love to dress up, wear makeup, perfume, clothes than flatter my figure, but I don't do it for male attention or even female attention and never have.
I do it because I like it.
I believe a lot of women think the same,

Syl wrote:I think society has moved on a lot since the days of 'Me man you woman'.

Many women want the no strings attached sex....many men have become more feminised...certainly more romantic.

I also think males care as much about their appearance as lots of females do.....they may still like the wham, bam, thank you mam way of wooing....but they wont get any if they are unatractive to the lady of the species.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:I think society has moved on a lot since the days of 'Me man you woman'.

Many women want the no strings attached sex....many men have become more feminised...certainly more romantic.

I also think males care as much about their appearance as lots of females do.....they may still like the wham, bam, thank you mam way of wooing....but they wont get any if they are unatractive to the lady of the species.

Have you seen that advert for that spray that traps poo smells under the water in the toilet?

Syl wrote:Many women want the no strings attached sex....many men have become more feminised...certainly more romantic.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:Many women want the no strings attached sex....many men have become more feminised...certainly more romantic.

Doncha think that's the power of the pill...or writ larger, all of contraception?  It's the classic pattern of industrialism, man overpowering the ways of Nature.

Syl wrote:I also think males care as much about their appearance as lots of females do.....they may still like the wham, bam, thank you mam way of wooing....but they wont get any if they are unatractive to the lady of the species.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:I also think males care as much about their appearance as lots of females do.....they may still like the wham, bam, thank you mam way of wooing....but they wont get any if they are unatractive to the lady of the species.

Think about it: men are blue blazers and black wingtip shoes.  Boooorrrrring!  Nowhere near what women do to attract attention.  Men are genetically designed to just go for it...forget being attractive.  As Trump said, grab the pussy!

On the other hand, what is attractive to women about men, is power and ability, in whatever way, shape or form.  It's first, brute strength; second, the pocketbook; and third, suave and sophisticated maneuvering.  No one looks at, or even cares about male genitalia.  It's not the work of art, the Venus de Milo; it's a tool...even called the tool.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Think about it: men are blue blazers and black wingtip shoes.  Boooorrrrring!  Nowhere near what women do to attract attention.  Men are genetically designed to just go for it...forget being attractive.  As Trump said, grab the pussy!

On the other hand, what is attractive to women about men, is power and ability, in whatever way, shape or form.  It's first, brute strength; second, the pocketbook; and third, suave and sophisticated maneuvering.  No one looks at, or even cares about male genitalia.  It's not the work of art, the Venus de Milo; it's a tool...even called the tool.

I cant remember the last time I saw a man in a blue blazer...especially a man who was trying to pull.
I agree power and strength attract women, they want a big strong seed to make strong babies, if that comes with money and power all the better....but.....even the most dedicated gold digger wants to be able to look at something nice.

Syl wrote:Venus is a work of art...so is David......which proves size doesn't matter, but good looks do.

And Quill....I don't think its wise to quote Trump as a measure of how men act towards women....he is a

eddie wrote:I also want to add that money does absolutely nothing at all to attract me to a man. Nothing.
It's pretty low on my list.

Syl wrote: I think Trump does care. His hair, which he insists on doing himself by all accounts, takes him ages, several mirrors and lots of hairspray....he is also anxious to appear gallant in public, he doesn't pull it off but he's still trying.

Syl wrote:Both Venus and David are works of art, some things just cant be pitted against each other.

Patrickcussen wrote:The Venus de Milo and Statue of David.
The Venus De Milo is most likely the most famous art sculpture in the world. This statue was the inspiration of Michelangelo's sculpture of David. If you compare the two together they look very similar. The David sculpture has arms where as The Venus De Milo has no arms. Many experts say that if the Venus did have arms it would be almost identical. The David was sculpted in the times of the Renaissance but the Venus was way before the major art period.  This masterwork, created out of a marble block from the quarries at Carrara that had already been worked on by an earlier hand, definitively established his prominence as a sculptor of extraordinary technical skill and strength of symbolic imagination. Also during this period, Michelangelo painted the Holy Family and St John. It is possible that the David was conceived as a political statue before Michelangelo began to work on it. Certainly David the giant-killer had long been seen as a political figure in Florence, and images of the Biblical hero already carried political implications there.

Syl wrote:Does anyone look at these statues and find them sexy?? I just think they are beautiful works of art.

It is amazing how similar they are...even the facial features are almost identical.

Syl wrote:Yes....odd I never noticed that before it was pointed out, did you?

Syl wrote:Does anyone look at these statues and find them sexy?? I just think they are beautiful works of art.

It is amazing how similar they are...even the facial features are almost identical.