EPTHot’ Legs the New Advertising Trend in Japan - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Shiragaku
Hong Kong4308 Posts
| ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
| ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:28 Blargh wrote: Indeed, and I would never argue that. But, I would argue against the usage of such advertising, as a person with dignity. Sometimes, degrading society into an even larger piece of shit isn't worth making more money. Many will disagree I'm sure. But, I personally hope, for the sake of humanity, people will not support advertising schemes as tasteless as this. @kafkaesque Stupidity spreads like a wildfire! I wouldn't be surprised if societies of the past used similar forms of advertisement! Progress in society is so hard to come by nowadays. : ( It can't ever be thought as appropriate to execute hard enforcement of good taste on society. That way tyranny lies. What you CAN do, though, is execute soft enforcement. First, boycott companies that use such advertisement. Second, talk to your peers about how disgusting that type of advertisement is. Essentially, do your own part in changing cultural response to such things. The alternatives are to simply accept it or to limit freedom of speech in what ways suit your own tastes. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:30 deth2munkies wrote: Pretty much this. It always amazes me that people think we're supposed to shame women into not doing things that they want to do because they are "degrading". Prostitution is degrading because it is a form of selling your body, but I don't think it should be banned. Just because I dislike something doesn't mean I think it should be illegal or culturally maligned. | ||
Daumen
Germany1073 Posts
;D Pretty good idea. Maybe this is too narrow-minded but why is it Insulting to Women? Same with erotic Ads etc, if they want to do it, let them do it. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:35 Acritter wrote: Prostitution is degrading because it is a form of selling your body, but I don't think it should be banned. Just because I dislike something doesn't mean I think it should be illegal or culturally maligned. There's a pretty huge difference between maligning something and making it illegal. Personally, I find prostitution rather immoral. I'm not against having it be legal, but neither do I think there's anything wrong with considering it rather degrading to women. I'm not sure if that's what you mean by cultural malignancy. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
whats the fuss about? | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
| ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:38 Shiori wrote: There's a pretty huge difference between maligning something and making it illegal. Personally, I find prostitution rather immoral. I'm not against having it be legal, but neither do I think there's anything wrong with considering it rather degrading to women. I'm not sure if that's what you mean by cultural malignancy. Cultural malignancy is when something is so hated in a culture that it is impossible to be/practice that thing and still be part of society. People won't treat you like you're human. I guess you could compare it to being Untouchable in the old Indian caste system. | ||
|
Veldril
Thailand1817 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:30 Shiragaku wrote: This is pretty disappointing and incredibly degrading to both men and women, but at least it is not sexual repression. In my opinion, we got stuck halfway in the sexual revolution. Sexual revolution doesn't really exist in Asia. | ||
|
Thor.Rush
Sweden702 Posts
| ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:50 Veldril wrote: Sexual revolution doesn't really exist in Asia. Chinese women don't have their feet bound any longer, and women aren't bought and sold as wives. At least, not too often. That's a start, right? | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
Shiragaku
Hong Kong4308 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:53 Acritter wrote: Chinese women don't have their feet bound any longer, and women aren't bought and sold as wives. At least, not too often. That's a start, right? Also birth control is much more available as well as pornography. East Asia really threw away the pseudo-Victorian idea of the modest woman. On March 27 2013 05:54 andrewlt wrote: Too much ado over nothing. I, for one, would rather have society evolve where we can view sex as a natural activity instead of something that is inherently sinful. Using sex to sell products is really no different than using greed, flashy colors, a desire to fit in/be different, the desire for security or any of the other advertising tropes that marketers continually use to appeal to people. Victorian prudishness is not my idea of an utopia. I agree completely as many people would. Sexual repression is incredibly dangerous and if anyone has read any of the Victorian sex stories, you can see why. But I think society could do better if it was sexually liberated and not perverted at the same time. I really do get upset when people excuse their perversion because it is opposing the harmful beliefs of sexual repression. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:54 andrewlt wrote: Too much ado over nothing. I, for one, would rather have society evolve where we can view sex as a natural activity instead of something that is inherently sinful. Using sex to sell products is really no different than using greed, flashy colors, a desire to fit in/be different, the desire for security or any of the other advertising tropes that marketers continually use to appeal to people. Victorian prudishness is not my idea of an utopia. There IS a difference, and it is that sex is often used to objectify people. Like, let's say you're selling an energy drink with an athlete, or selling an investment firm with a successful businessman/woman. That is focusing on their accomplishments as a reason for you to buy the product. On the other hand, selling a product with attractive men or women often is just based on turning them into someTHING to look at rather than someONE to look at. They aren't a person any longer, but just a collection of sexually exciting body parts. Sex itself is not bad. Turning people into things is very, very bad. | ||
|
Blargh
United States2103 Posts
That's why I'm posting on a forum about how I disapprove ^_^. Anyway, the ethics of this are similar to the lottery. It's abusing stupidity in order to make a profit. Should it be illegal? Well, I think it should, but since I'm no dictator or ruler, that will not ever happen. I'm okay with oppression if it's aligned with my beliefs, ya know :D? But really, I can tolerate this kind of stuff being legal, but I think society should put forward the effort of opposing it (much like I do!) I do not know what all effects this has on women, equality, other miscellaneous ethical shit, but I doubt it's improving it any. | ||
|
Veldril
Thailand1817 Posts
On March 27 2013 05:58 Shiragaku wrote: Also birth control is much more available as well as pornography. East Asia really threw away the pseudo-Victorian idea of the modest woman. I agree completely as many people would. Sexual repression is incredibly dangerous and if anyone has read any of the Victorian sex stories, you can see why. But I think society could do better if it was sexually liberated and not perverted at the same time. It's better than the past, that's for sure. But if you compare to the change in the EU/US, I would not say it is really a sexual revolution as a whole in Asia (which include India and middle east, as they are still very conservative in this regard). I would say that Japanese might be the sole exception in this regard but I don't really know about the ex-Soviet countries in this regard, though. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On March 27 2013 06:00 Blargh wrote: Totally agree with your post above Acritter. That's why I'm posting on a forum about how I disapprove ^_^. Anyway, the ethics of this are similar to the lottery. It's abusing stupidity in order to make a profit. Should it be illegal? Well, I think it should, but since I'm no dictator or ruler, that will not ever happen. I'm okay with oppression if it's aligned with my beliefs, ya know :D? But really, I can tolerate this kind of stuff being legal, but I think society should put forward the effort of opposing it (much like I do!) I do not know what all effects this has on women, equality, other miscellaneous ethical shit, but I doubt it's improving it any. You can make a very good argument against the legalization of practices that abuse stupidity for profit, as they encourage activity that lowers the average sensibility of humans and thus undermine democracy. Of course, I take the reverse view of this and say that instead people should be educated, assuming that educated individuals aren't as susceptible to such crude advertising. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On March 27 2013 04:05 Alpino wrote: Not having both implies that one who answers clever marketing has no moral reservations with these kind of ads while one who answers "Insulting to woman" has. I guess. Clever marketing is just that though. As long as people notice it that means it's working regardless of what you or I think. | ||
| ||
