Is This Safe Sex Ad Offensive And/Or Misogynist?
Posted by: Amelia McDonell-Parry
Filed in:
news
12:30PM, Thursday June 18th 2009
To see the full NSFW ad, click past the jump. This Portuguese ad, targeted at women, promotes safe sex. It’s hard to read, but the text up top says, “Girls, protect yourself. Demand your partner wear a condom.” It’s some seriously shocking imagery, but does it go too far? Megan at Jezebel wrote (in a post that’s since been taken down):
Sexualizing rape and domestic violence and putting the onus on women to protect themselves scream “safe” to me, too.
On one hand, I see her point. Pointing a gun at a vagina is certainly graphic and sexually violent imagery out of context. However, each of us is responsible for protecting our bodies from STDs and this ad is trying to imply that having sex without a condom is the equivalent of firing a loaded weapon at your, uh, vital parts. Is that message clear without the text? Not necessarily, so in that regard, it doesn’t work. But in combination, it’s certainly powerful. What do you think?
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
Riley
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 12:37 pm: [report]
If they had used a revolver it could go the “Russian Roulette” aspect of unprotected sex.
With that gun though, and no text to associate with it, it just looks like someone is about to go postal.
EastCoastMale
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 12:49 pm: [report]
As a male who is whole heartedly and absolutely against domestic violence of any kind and violence against women, I do not see the ad as either offensive or misogynistic. Think about how hard it is to get people to really pay attention to whatever critical issue it is that you are trying to promote awareness about. I think this is especially a tough task in a country that has had one of the higher STD transmission rates in recent years due to both sexual interaction and drug use. Grabbing someones attention with an image that has a informative purpose and does not promote violence in any way with its verbiage is perfectly acceptable in my opinion and probably works much better than having just text on a poster.
Jessica Wakeman
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 12:54 pm: [report]
I don’t think the message is clear without text, so I wish the text were larger and easier to read. But I don’t think it sexualizes violence in an inappropriate way—it’s a sexual image with violence, but it’s not implying violence itself is sexy (unless you’re a sick f*** to begin with).
Seriously, I think safe sex orgs should just put up pictures of genitals with STDs on them like we used to see in health class. THAT would get people wearing condoms and getting tested regularly.
ksdancer
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 02:25 pm: [report]
No or practically non-existent / non-readable text promotes violence against women and frankly, my thought is this ad shows an out-and-out threat of rape against women.
I think it is incredible how men (who are SO afraid of women’ sexuality to begin with) would promote such an image. INSANE
Arsenic
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 03:06 pm: [report]
While I don’t think that this image sexualizes violence, I don’t think its ok either. The ad would have just as much of an impact by playing the Russian roulette angle (with the gun pointed BY her at her head). There’s really no need to expose women to something like that to make a point.
EastCoastMale
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 03:12 pm: [report]
I strongly disagree with you both, ksdancer and Arsenic but I do respect your points of view.
ksdancer
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 03:47 pm: [report]
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion…..however, ECM, you ARE a man, and have never lived in a woman’s body for even one moment, so you can only GUESS what it would be like. Sorry.
snap
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 03:53 pm: [report]
i have to agree with ksdancer. i don’t think ECM really understands the subtext of the photo.
joyy
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 04:00 pm: [report]
The ad portrays sex as akin to being dangerous as being shot at, which is a nice scare tactic if you’re into that stuff.
Why not have the same crotch shot with the girl holding a gun over her naughty bits? It would actually portray one protecting oneself, convey the seriousnes (in hyperbole, of course) of the need to protect yourself & your partner(wrap it up or else), would not resemble rape at all, and is still the startling image of pussies and guns?!
Biologist
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 05:58 pm: [report]
In making a this ad, they should have two goals. First: get the viewer’s attention-which they did very well. Second: inform the viewer to the point you want to make-which they failed at miserably. I think the image could have been very good if they had used large bold lettering across the top, or showed bullets being loaded into the gun that said ‘STD’ on them. As far as the other message of it being a woman’s job to demand safe sex, I also would like to see a partner add to this; maybe featuring naked guy with a giant pencil sharpener or something. (I couldn’t really think of something as attention getting, but I am not in advertising either!) As a guy, I definitely think about STD’s as being at least equally my responsibility. As a person without STD’s, I think it is completely my responsibility to keep it that way!
emflow
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 07:16 pm: [report]
While I understand ECM’s post about the value of shocking people into paying attention, I think that has the potential to backfire. Ad campaigns based on shocking people can also desensitize viewers to the image depicted and the message.
But this ad is also sexual and violent. So it has the potential to desensitize people to images and acts of sexual violence.
emflow
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 07:20 pm: [report]
Oh, also, I don’t like the relationship subtext here, as in: “Yeah that guy you have sex with? You should view him with suspicion and distrust, the same way you look at a potential mugger/rapist on the street.”
I am NOT saying anyone should take their partner’s word and forgo a condom. But the message this ad sends about sexual relationships doesn’t seem like a healthy outlook.
freddie_my_love
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 11:01 pm: [report]
The first thing I thought of when I saw this was the issue of rape as a weapon in war, and how women are often violated with weapons. Also a gun is being pointed at a naked woman, which in itself is a little bit disturbing. While I know that’s not at all what they were getting at, things don’t happen in a vacuum.
I can see what they were trying to do with the add, but I think they could have been more effective, and less triggering.
TexasRanchBuck
wrote on June 18 2009 @ 11:07 pm: [report]
Ad sucks.
friskyman68
wrote on June 19 2009 @ 05:42 am: [report]
Im trying to see the NSFW picture…how?
crustee
wrote on June 19 2009 @ 06:12 am: [report]
I do think this ad sexualizes rape. I also think that it serves as an immense trigger to those who have experienced rape or domestic violence.
Yes, MTV, it’s a powerful ad. It’s also quite tasteless.
bogart4017
wrote on June 19 2009 @ 11:18 am: [report]
unforch, we have become so desensitized as a people it takes a lot to get out attention. This is just one example.
EastCoastMale
wrote on June 19 2009 @ 11:33 am: [report]
@um no and ksdancer
I do not believe it is that I don’t understand the subtext of the photo but rather it is that I simply understand what the motivation might be when creating an ad to grab peoples attention and alert them to a possible danger related to pregnancy and STDs.
ksdancer, you are correct in that I am am man and have never lived in a womans body for even one moment but I frankly see how that has much to do with understanding the point an ad was trying to make while commenting on the fact that I did not find it to be misogynistic or to promote violence against women. The last time I checked, the cause of un-planned pregnancy and most STD transmission was the interaction between two people, one male and one female so I think I have a right as a male to comment on how I think an image conveys it message. With regard to not having ever lived as a female, not even for one moment, I don’t think this disqualifies my opinion based solely on that. The fact that I find this ad to be an image that would grab peoples attention in order to get them to look more closely at the text ( my gosh…could that have been the intent? to purposely make it small so readers must come closer to see the positive message they are conveying instead of plastering text over an image and risk compromising its impact…) does not mean that it or I promote violence against women simply because of the imagery.
I do thank you for dismissing me based on my sex so quickly and efficiently but I think the “you’re a man and don’t know what its like” reasoning, applied to this specific example of my comment is BS. Sorry.
EastCoastMale
wrote on June 19 2009 @ 11:34 am: [report]
Pardon the grammatical errors.
Arsenic
wrote on June 23 2009 @ 01:03 pm: [report]
@ECM
Look, its not that I don’t think you have a right to say what you feel. Everyone does. But when it comes down to it, the fact of it is is that very few men really understand what it is like to constantly have to keep your safety in the front of your mind. To be a woman in this day and age means you have a 1 in 3 chance of being raped- usually by someone you know and trust. Women are often victims of violent crime, but seldom perpetrators. Every single women I know has been touched or groped without her permission at some point in her life. Few men understand what its like to have to take your safety into your own hands every time you walk outside after dark. Few men understand what its like to not be able to go for a walk with your father without someone calling you a “gold digger bitch”.
I’m not here to have a misery-p*nis competition, men have it tough too. Everyone does. I can cry without people calling me a sissy- most men can’t, and when it comes to a discussion on the display of emotions, I will defer to you. But right now you need to trust that maybe you really DON’T know what its like- just like I really don’t know what its like to be unable to show emotion without people calling me a f*g.
TexasRanchBuck
wrote on June 23 2009 @ 05:42 pm: [report]
Most people getting handgun carry permits are women. About 75% here in Texas.
No man will mess with a woman with a handgun, no how no way jose.
Tink
egrant2
wrote on July 24 2009 @ 09:59 pm: [report]
I think I agree with Riley, it seems as though they were going for something, but it just wasnt all there. I agree this is very blunt and abrupt almost, but also it kinda shows the point they are getting across.
If there were some text to support, then maybe people may have taken less offense!!
MTV: I like it…just make it a lil better next time!
Sakura Kawaii-hime
wrote on September 9 2009 @ 12:36 pm: [report]
I like the revolver idea with the gun…. if you make the gun bigger and put a type of STD on a few of the bullets in the revolver and really make it look Russian roulette then the image wouldnt really need the words ant the top though with the words at the top it would make the message all that more powerful. For instances you could put the bullets in the revolver like this… Baby, nothing, HIV, Herpes, HPV to show just how high the stakes are of getting somethin.