PETA superbowl ad "Too sexy" - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 01-28-2009, 10:09 AM
Beginner
 
OilPatch197's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 169
Quote:
American television network NBC has refused to air a Super Bowl advertisement from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals featuring scantily clad models handling vegetables.



Victoria Morgan, NBC Universal's advertising standards executive, said the advert "depicts a level of sexuality exceeding our standards".



NBC asked the organisation to edit some of the racy scenes out of the ad but Peta refused.



"Apparently, NBC has something against girls who love their veggies," wrote blogger Amy Elizabeth on Peta's website.



I've heard the reports that vegetarians have better sex, which is the focus of the ad.



Never heard that Vegetarians have better sex! They should still run the ad, clearly NBC has no "taste".
OilPatch197 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 01-28-2009, 10:14 AM
Beginner
 
Katt Fink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,312
Yeah. I guess they felt the "completely-accidental-not-premeditated-at-all-to-attract-publicity" Janet Jackson tittyslip was a little more wholesome and family friendly.
Katt Fink is offline  
#3 Old 01-28-2009, 10:18 AM
Administrator
 
Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,871
I highly doubt PETA had any intention of showing an ad during the Super Bowl and made an ad they knew would be refused because they know it'll get posted all over the web.



They do the same thing every year.



http://blog.peta.org/archives/2008/0...to_fox_wtf.php

Follow me on Twitter - @_jorts
Michael is offline  
#4 Old 01-28-2009, 10:18 AM
Beginner
 
SquarePeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,712
PETA knew before they even tried to buy the airtime that the ad would be too racy. That's why they made it. They do this consistently. Make over-the-top racy ads (billboards, tv ads, print ads) that they know will never be aired/printed so that they can get news time with the "PETA add to hot to show." Because once they do that people will flock to the website to see what the "big deal" is. They get more exposure by making ads that won't be run than by making ads that will actually be run.



It's simple business. PETA does this intentionally.



"News" would actually be PETA making an ad that could/would be run in a magazine or on tv. This isn't news it's business as usual for PETA.

I am the user formerly known as MrsKey
SquarePeg is offline  
#5 Old 01-28-2009, 10:23 AM
Beginner
 
a7dk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
I, for one, am consistently annoyed by PETA's sexist advertising. It really annoys me that they need naked (extremely thin, "beautiful" by western society standards) women to make their point. (My apologies if the "scantily clad models" referred to in the ad were actually men)



It seems to me somewhat hypocritical to advocate against using animals as mere means while simultaneously treating women in this way.
a7dk is offline  
#6 Old 01-28-2009, 10:37 AM
Beginner
 
fadeaway1289's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 10,324
I heard about this earlier. From the description of the commercial it sounds ridiculous and disgusting. I'm sorry but PETA annoys me as well. I get that sex sells but c'mon. You can get the veggie message across without using naked women or commercials depicting beautiful women practically having sex with vegetables/or getting aroused by them (thats the description I heard anyways). There were comments from people that have seen it that said if anything it turned them off to eating vegetables.
fadeaway1289 is offline  
#7 Old 01-28-2009, 10:38 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post

I highly doubt PETA had any intention of showing an ad during the Super Bowl and made an ad they knew would be refused because they know it'll get posted all over the web.



They do the same thing every year.



http://blog.peta.org/archives/2008/0...to_fox_wtf.php



Yup, and they don't have to pay the network millions of dollars.
PTree15 is offline  
#8 Old 01-28-2009, 11:07 AM
Beginner
 
SquarePeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadeaway1289 View Post

I heard about this earlier. From the description of the commercial it sounds ridiculous and disgusting. I'm sorry but PETA annoys me as well. I get that sex sells but c'mon. You can get the veggie message across without using naked women or commercials depicting beautiful women practically having sex with vegetables/or getting aroused by them (thats the description I heard anyways). There were comments from people that have seen it that said if anything it turned them off to eating vegetables.



It was, in my opinion, anything but sexy. And pretty much the way you described it. Not, again in my opinion, a great endorsement for vegetarian living. Just another sexist publicity stunt in which PETA uses nearly naked women.

I am the user formerly known as MrsKey
SquarePeg is offline  
#9 Old 01-28-2009, 11:10 AM
Beginner
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,068
I'm not comfortable with PETA's tendency to objectify women either. I also am not comfortable with the way that I think a lot of people have double standards concerning what objectification they object to. Omnis for example participate in objectification every day with their choices, but they present themselves as somehow progressive in their thinking when they get to criticize PETA.

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
#10 Old 01-28-2009, 11:11 AM
Administrator
 
Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,871
Here's the ad for those who are curious. It's slightly worse than a Victoria's Secret ad so if those offend you you might want to skip it altogether.



Not safe for work!



[youtube]5GJiIXn87BQ[/youtube]

Follow me on Twitter - @_jorts
Michael is offline  
#11 Old 01-28-2009, 11:18 AM
Beginner
 
SquarePeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,712
Maybe the reason I don't like this ad is because my mom always taught me not to play with my food.

I am the user formerly known as MrsKey
SquarePeg is offline  
#12 Old 01-28-2009, 11:21 AM
Beginner
 
Irizary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenseas View Post

I'm not comfortable with PETA's tendency to objectify women either. I also am not comfortable with the way that I think a lot of people have double standards concerning what objectification they object to. Omnis for example participate in objectification every day with their choices, but they present themselves as somehow progressive in their thinking when they get to criticize PETA.



Because adult women are choosing - often freely volunteering - to be in ads for PETA, I generally don't agree with this line of criticizing PETA. I don't see adult women as helpless victims of representation.



In what way is advertising generally "exploiting" people through representation? It's always exploiting some human feature or endeavor.

"If you want to know where you would have stood on slavery before the civil war, don't look at where you stand on slavery today, look at where you stand on animal rights." - Paul Watson.

 

Every animal you eat
was running for her life

Irizary is offline  
#13 Old 01-28-2009, 11:30 AM
Beginner
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irizary View Post

Because adult women are choosing - often freely volunteering - to be in ads for PETA, I generally don't agree with this line of criticizing PETA. I don't see adult women as helpless victims of representation.

Well I think this counter-argument is a defense for advertising accused of sexism generally: whether the ads are for beer, cars or "male fragrance", the women probably are in them voluntarily.



I would personally rather use the criticism against PETA as a springboard for attacking the objectification a lot of omnis engage in, than to become an unintentional apologist for, say, Axe.



Quote:
In what way is advertising generally "exploiting" people through representation? It's always exploiting some human feature or endeavor.

I would submit that such human features as e.g. a sense of humor, intelligence or athletic skill are not surrounded by societal problems that would be even close to those surrounding women's bodies.

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
#14 Old 01-28-2009, 11:46 AM
Beginner
 
veggiemeggie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irizary View Post

Because adult women are choosing - often freely volunteering - to be in ads for PETA, I generally don't agree with this line of criticizing PETA. I don't see adult women as helpless victims of representation.



In what way is advertising generally "exploiting" people through representation? It's always exploiting some human feature or endeavor.



Just because the women volunteered to be in the ad doesn't mean that the ad doesn't objectify women...
veggiemeggie is offline  
#15 Old 01-28-2009, 12:01 PM
Beginner
 
a7dk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Thanks Michael. It's hard to believe that particular advertisement is even effective.
a7dk is offline  
#16 Old 01-28-2009, 12:19 PM
Beginner
 
dormouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,393
PETA: Trying to make animals' lives better by treating women like meat.



Seriously, there are more tasteful ways to depict the message "Vegetarians have better sex" than making this look like a Penthouse magazine. It would be better if there was a man in the commercial looking hot too, but the message I get from this ad is women=ready and willing for sex all the time, even with asparagus.
dormouse is offline  
#17 Old 01-28-2009, 12:29 PM
Beginner
 
OilPatch197's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 169
Quote:
but the message I get from this ad is women=ready and willing for sex all the time, even with asparagus.



I get the impression that vegetarian women are hawt....but in reality...
OilPatch197 is offline  
#18 Old 01-28-2009, 12:42 PM
Beginner
 
Shamandura's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,497
Seems like a "fitting" superbowl ad, but I hardly see how it would be effective.
Shamandura is offline  
#19 Old 01-28-2009, 12:47 PM
Beginner
 
Amira's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by OilPatch197 View Post

I get the impression that vegetarian women are hawt....but in reality...



We are too hawt! Even we old ones. (I used to drive a red Porsche)
Amira is offline  
#20 Old 01-28-2009, 12:47 PM
Beginner
 
m4rk0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 982
Quote:
Originally Posted by OilPatch197 View Post

I get the impression that vegetarian women are hawt....but in reality...



OilPatch197
m4rk0 is offline  
#21 Old 01-28-2009, 12:51 PM
Beginner
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by m4rk0 View Post

OilPatch197

He/she/whatever hands out some real gems.

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
#22 Old 01-28-2009, 12:57 PM
Beginner
 
beatricious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,904
I don't really have any reaction to that ad other than and possibly
beatricious is offline  
#23 Old 01-28-2009, 01:05 PM
Beginner
 
SomebodyElse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In a California Ghost Town
Posts: 7,245
I hope no one is drawing conclusions about the "hawtness" of vegetarian woman based on PETA models. PETA's record for choosing actual vegetarians to represent them in the media is notoriously bad.

www.thesaucyvegan.com
SomebodyElse is offline  
#24 Old 01-28-2009, 01:06 PM
Beginner
 
counting_hours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by dormouse View Post

PETA: Trying to make animals' lives better by treating women like meat.



Oh Dormouse, your saying always get me

I totally agree with this though!
counting_hours is offline  
#25 Old 01-28-2009, 01:10 PM
Beginner
 
Bells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,659
I doubt a single person will become a vegetarian because of this add. It's ridiculous.
Bells is offline  
#26 Old 01-28-2009, 01:47 PM
Beginner
 
Digger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,900
Didn't really notice the women, but the veggies were hawt.
Digger is offline  
#27 Old 01-28-2009, 01:50 PM
Beginner
 
dormouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by OilPatch197 View Post

I get the impression that vegetarian women are hawt....but in reality...



Hey, man....I mean, I know I don't walk around my house in lingerie or fellate cucumbers, but I think I'm kinda hot....
dormouse is offline  
#28 Old 01-28-2009, 01:52 PM
Beginner
 
martino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenseas View Post

Well I think this counter-argument is a defense for advertising accused of sexism generally: whether the ads are for beer, cars or "male fragrance", the women probably are in them voluntarily.



I think the argument does have some merit, in that, as far as I know, it's usually women who want to promote vegetarianism, whereas for most ads, it's actors who need money. Any actor I know needs money. Unless they're a big name, they'll take nearly any job they can.



However, I agree; the objectification is ridiculous. Why not just have the people talking honestly about vegetarianism? I know the mantra in advertising is that honesty won't sell, but then look at Barack Obama (sidenote: I'm now jealous of Americans; so far, your leader could kick our leader's butt. Easily.). He's all about honesty, and look where it got him?



This is rambling and unfocused...but yeah, I agree. Objectification is ridiculous. There's a Bell commercial here that has been annoying me lately, with a guy who hires a bunch of cheerleaders to cheer while he talks to his (male) buddy about getting Bell. They're completely treated like objects. Nothing more. They get screen time for their cheers. And they're completely irrelevant otherwise.
martino is offline  
#29 Old 01-28-2009, 02:08 PM
Beginner
 
Lain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 318
I hope the next guy I date doesn't see this and think I'll try to seduce him with a pumpkin.



Actually, like most things, it made me think of an xkcd cartoon.

http://xkcd.com/236/
Lain is offline  
#30 Old 01-28-2009, 02:18 PM
Beginner
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by martino View Post

I think the argument does have some merit, in that, as far as I know, it's usually women who want to promote vegetarianism, whereas for most ads, it's actors who need money. Any actor I know needs money. Unless they're a big name, they'll take nearly any job they can.

Do you mean that limited economic opportunities limit the voluntariness of women being in the usual ads? I think that may be true, but analogously to that I would argue that the gender roles in our society limit the voluntariness of how the women in PETA's ads choose to express themselves.



'Voluntary', when not taken in the crude "no one put a gun to your head" sense, is a complex notion.

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off