zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. samatm+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-07-14 15:00:39
I wish that commenters on the Internet generally, and HN in particular, would lay off "murder and jaywalking" arguments.

If Gandi advertised with lewds, well. People would complain and they would probably stop.

The "scummy actions and questionable security practices" are both necessary and sufficient to persuade the informed reader not to patronize their services. Bringing in additional minor peccadillos weakens the argument by bringing out everyone who likes tits in ads.

No one likes the kind of bad behavior GoDaddy is known for.

This comment might seem a bit out-of-place if you don't happen to use showdead.

replies(1): >>sjtind+w2
2. sjtind+w2[view] [source] 2022-07-14 15:13:51
>>samatm+(OP)
To me, using women to sell a product reeks of a bygone era and a certain mentality we’re working to get away from. I think that alone is a perfectly acceptable reason to think a company sucks and not use their product. Voting for behaviors with your dollars is important.
replies(2): >>DocTom+fw >>samatm+f71
◧◩
3. DocTom+fw[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-07-14 17:19:11
>>sjtind+w2
I wonder if it is more dehumanizing to the affected woman to show an attractive woman, or to not show women at all.

I think to be consistent with the 'don't use women for ads' approach, you need to be opposed to use human-based or non-product-related human interest advertisement at all, which includes, but is probably not limited to men [1], children [2], the elderly [3], people of a certain demographic and/or sexual orientation and/or gender identity [4], or national rivalries [5][6] or stereotypes [7] or even the concepts of such. You would also have to have a stern look at the art scene, because sex also sells as sculpture, on canvas, as a particularly suggestive voice or on the screen - it may be part of the work, but it also has an advertising effect.

And what a bleak world would that be.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C-vYY3SBDE [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqgSO8_cRio [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG4IaHgqH00 [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw_gHMNs5iE [5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWvKVE6rLI0 [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g72KE8dmjc [7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMQnPWjK5pE

◧◩
4. samatm+f71[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-07-14 20:41:48
>>sjtind+w2
While this is of course reductive, my counterexample is cosmetics and women's fashion generally, I'm happy to agree where internet services are concerned.
[go to top]