Semi-nude lingerie model wearing only panties

From ‘Does lingerie ad show women in right light?’, 16 Feb 2011, Today online. Thanks to quirkyhill.

(Grace Leong): I saw a big lingerie advertisement near a bus stop along Pasir Ris Drive 1. It shows frontal view of a bigger-than-life semi-nude model, wearing only panties, her bare chest covered by her arms.

…Are there are any decency guidelines for public advertisements to adhere to?

As such advertisements are easily accessible to children and teenagers, how can parents protect their young children and teenagers from being exposed to such images? Where does one draw the line?

If the purpose was to sell ladies’ panties, I am not sure how successful it is considering that most ladies are probably too embarrassed to look long enough to find out what is being sold.

How should lingerie companies advertise then? Ask your customers, whom I assume are mostly women, what is tasteful and what is taboo?

Women like to be seen as sensuous and beautiful but not objects that gratify sexual lust. It is a fine line and it may backfire if the line is crossed.

Double happiness

Not only does the writer imply that all women are prudes like herself by suggesting that such imagery do not work because they are ‘too embarrassed to look long enough’, but she’s hopelessly naive to the fact that lingerie ads are not girly Sex in the City movie posters designed to capture only female attention. Lingerie ads are a classic example of collateral seduction in advertising, where the actual consumers of the product are of a different sex from those whose attention the ads were  really designed to capture, namely male audiences with female counterparts, who upon noticing that their aroused male partners are drooling over topless women in panties, are subliminally fed with the magical, irrational association that wearing such panties would make them more attractive to their men. If this planet were made up of nothing but women, we wouldn’t have Guess models and Victoria’s Secret would be just be called The Bra Shop. And if the major brands were to let women decide what to put on an ad from the very beginning, granny panties would never have gone out of fashion.

I believe women, unless they’re lesbians, don’t wear designer lingerie to impress other women. That job is done by shoes and bags, not lacy underwear. And I believe women  today are resilient and mature enough not to be so affected by topless ads they have to shield their burning eyes from it. I believe they are smart and independent enough to embrace sexuality as a confidence-building weapon to wield control over the lust-driven visual automatons that are men, and perhaps the writer should spend some time frolicking in the garden smelling daisies  instead of sequestering herself in an iron tower spending her free time browsing chastity belt catalogues.

In fact, the reasoning of ‘women too embarrassed’ to identify the product is a presumptuous excuse for what is clearly a cry against blatant sexploitation and an overzealous and misguided ‘preservation of moral fibre and conservative Asian values’ stance so skewed to monastic nanny proportions to be taken seriously. Kids probably spend more time in front of the TV watching nasty trailers or on their iPhones playing with naughty apps than nursing erections at bus stops. So complaining about bus stop ads being too sexy is like lamenting about seashells washed ashore on a beach having edges so sharp you can cut your feet on them i.e useless. Sometimes even a harmless image in the national papers ( with naked men, mind you. Does that show men in the ‘right light’, then?), or a Rolling stone magazine, would get misinterpreted as a conspiracy to bring out the perverts in all of us. But then again, in the light of our flailing fertility rates, that wouldn’t be such a bad thing after all.

About these ads

8 Responses

  1. hahahaha, i saw this letter, and thought the same thing!

  2. OH i realized i misread your original answer hence assumed you’d wrote the letter ;)

  3. Hi

    please remove the B&W picture, it does not belong to you & no permission was given to use the picture.

    please respect intellectual property rights.

  4. i shared the same thoughts with you.. The definition of some stuff are really, truly determined by the minds of the beholder.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 295 other followers

%d bloggers like this: