W to the T to the F?
Jun. 22nd, 2007 05:27 pmBeen a bit of a stir up over this ad campaign. Rightly so. Anything that actively advertises "loose weight, you fat ugly female sows but not for you or your health--do it for the man that you so desperately need in your pathetic, overweight excuse for a life" is disgusting.
It's also completely undermined as a message--men only dig bony chicks--when you
a) pick a famous image that was never sexy because the woman in it was so skinny you couldn't see her tits because her ribs were bigger
and
b) pick a healthy-sized larger woman who is by no means fat but is instead quite beautiful and curvy in very sexy ways
Seriously, this chick is buxom and smiling happily and beautiful. Mena Suvari looks like they put a pretty girl's head on the body of a concentration camp survivor. I mean, one rose petal covers Mena's naughty parts; one rose petal doesn't ever cover the nipple action of the model in the ad campaign. It's like Jill at feministe says, though: which is worse? Telling women they have to be skinny in order to get a man or telling them that this woman is to be considered a hideous blubber beast?
Fuck that, man.
It's also completely undermined as a message--men only dig bony chicks--when you
a) pick a famous image that was never sexy because the woman in it was so skinny you couldn't see her tits because her ribs were bigger
and
b) pick a healthy-sized larger woman who is by no means fat but is instead quite beautiful and curvy in very sexy ways
Seriously, this chick is buxom and smiling happily and beautiful. Mena Suvari looks like they put a pretty girl's head on the body of a concentration camp survivor. I mean, one rose petal covers Mena's naughty parts; one rose petal doesn't ever cover the nipple action of the model in the ad campaign. It's like Jill at feministe says, though: which is worse? Telling women they have to be skinny in order to get a man or telling them that this woman is to be considered a hideous blubber beast?
Fuck that, man.
no subject
Date: 2007-06-23 04:59 am (UTC)Good to know.
no subject
Date: 2007-06-23 09:54 pm (UTC)