Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nude baby ads inquiry

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nude baby ads inquiry

    Nude baby ads inquiry

    Sometimes I just don't know about people. I honestly never thought this kind of thing would ever happen. I'm sure there intentions are noble, but this is taking it too far. By these people's logic we should ban shoe ads, because some people get turned on by feet.

  • #2
    No way!

    This is beyond belief! I simply do not know what to say. Perhaps they should ban commercials showing women doing their lips-I just want to jump through the screen and kiss them (NOT!)

    Comment


    • #3
      The solution is simple: keep nudity out of adverts. It isn't necessary and will inevitably lead to complaints.

      There are plenty of ways products can be advertised without showing nakedness. A complete ban on nudity in advertising would mean an end to complaints from people who were offended, alarmed or annoyed by it and everyone would be happy.

      Stu

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by simonsebs View Post
        Nude baby ads inquiry

        Sometimes I just don't know about people. I honestly never thought this kind of thing would ever happen. I'm sure there intentions are noble, but this is taking it too far. By these people's logic we should ban shoe ads, because some people get turned on by feet.
        Oh. My. God. I couldn't even finish reading the article after i read "The nappy advertisements top the complaints in the category about sexualisation of children.'' How on EARTH is a naked baby sexual?? I mean really! I swear some people are so sexually repressed, that they see it in everything! Yikes!

        And yes, Simon. With that mentality, then shoe ads should be banned as well. Or really, ANY ads that contain ANYthing because EVERYthing can be construed as sexual by SOMEone! Geez!

        *big cleansing sigh* Everyone has the right to their own opinion though. But how will humanity ever progress, with so many repressed, angry. mis-guided people in it?

        And that of course, is but MY opinion. *another cleansing sigh*

        Comment


        • #5
          Even though I do not understand why someone would be upset by the images, I am not surprized by the complaints. I see the bluring of the butts of babies on TV now. It is just absurd the way some react to simple nudity.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Stu2630 View Post
            The solution is simple: keep nudity out of adverts. It isn't necessary and will inevitably lead to complaints.

            There are plenty of ways products can be advertised without showing nakedness. A complete ban on nudity in advertising would mean an end to complaints from people who were offended, alarmed or annoyed by it and everyone would be happy.

            Stu
            Good grief. That is as bad as the original story.

            I have seen the "nappy" ads, and have NEVER seen one where the child was sexualized. Ever.

            The next thing we know, babies will have to be dressed in baby burkhas or something in order to not offend. Sheesh.

            Oh, heck, why don't we all just wrap ourselves in bulky blankets so as to not offend.

            Comment


            • #7
              Boreas

              I have seen the "nappy" ads, and have NEVER seen one where the child was sexualized. Ever.
              Neither have I. I have not seen any nappy advert which offended me, but they do offend some people. It's perfectly easy to make adverts that don't offend anyone, so why don't they do that?

              I can accept some latitude with regard to TV programmes where there can be a warning as to content, but you can't have warnings with adverts, so they should be 100% innocuous to virtually any audience.

              Stu

              Comment


              • #8
                Stu, it is impossible to please everyone in this large world! OBVIOUSLY!

                Comment


                • #9
                  People need to seriously relax, take a step back and realize babies are bare bottomed when you change a diaper! Its just how it is.
                  We are all naked at some point in the day as well, we shower right!!!
                  Not sexual and not obscene!
                  What next......

                  Oh, the Arby's commercials get me, whats that big thing sticking out of everyones head?!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The only issue I have with the diaper commercials is when they show a female hand tracing the curve of the baby's butt. That is just odd to me.

                    But for anyone to be so offended at a diaper ad that they would write complaint letters astounds me. And these people actually worry about the nudity sexualizing babies? I'm sure a select few would actually find babies in diapers sexual, but the vast majority of people are going to see them as fine.

                    And then these people actually think that seeing clothed babies will help. When it comes to sexualizing children in the mind, pedophiles do not care if the child is dressed or naked. The mere fact that she is a child is enough.

                    Stu:" The solution is simple: keep nudity out of adverts."

                    No, the solution is to keep sexual imagery out of adverts. The solution is for society to stop looking at everything through the lens of a pedophile. Actively looking at things through the eyes of a pedophile destroys the child's innocence. They are not allowed to do things based on fear of what will happen to them, even if they don't completely understand it. While trying to keep a child innocent of sexual matters, this kind of society actually hinders a child's innocence and makes them think about things well before they should.

                    One last thing and a bit off topic: in the US, the term nappy used by the wrong person can lead to racial issues. Nappy generally describes the hair of African-American girls and women. I recall one white teacher who read a book called "Nappy Hair" and had parents protest her due to her "insensitivity."

                    Bob S.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Anyone who thinks 'baby nappy ads' are sexual needs to be put under psychiatric observation and probably added to Megan's list ...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Well, it's like when they changed the little girl on Coppertone bottles to remove her (lacking a better word, forgive me) butt crack. Now it's just a smooth, round bump on her backside.

                        I used to work in a bookstore and we had a book in the photography section called "Naked Babies". Didn't last too long before it was pulled from the shelves.

                        My son turned 5 years old in April and he is still quite comfortable being nude (aided I am sure by my fairly-regular nudity and my wife's occasional nudity). I do have worries about bringing him to nudist venues, even though I know they are probably MUCH safer than normal beaches, but ultimately, I feel it is better to let him be free and unashamed than to pass on the paranoia that is running rampant these days. I keep him close, keep my eye on him at all times. I know that there's a better chance of him encountering a pedophile at a regular beach.

                        Yes, obviously, we need to protect our children, but I don't think we are doing them any favours by smothering them and killing their innocence just because we are afraid of what someone else might be thinking.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Bob S
                          No, the solution is to keep sexual imagery out of adverts. The solution is for society to stop looking at everything through the lens of a pedophile. Actively looking at things through the eyes of a pedophile destroys the child's innocence. They are not allowed to do things based on fear of what will happen to them, even if they don't completely understand it. While trying to keep a child innocent of sexual matters, this kind of society actually hinders a child's innocence and makes them think about things well before they should.
                          :hippy:

                          Right to the point. Beauty! Well said.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Iowaman

                            No, you can't please everyone, but if you know a certain type of content in an advert is likely to offend a significant number of people, why not avoid that content?

                            BobS

                            No, the solution is to keep sexual imagery out of adverts.
                            I think there's a place for moderate sexual imagery in some adverts. It would be hard to imagine an advert for, say, Chanel perfume not to be a bit sexy because the woman who buys it wants to make herself sexy. I do draw a distinction between the appropriate use of glamour, which you would find in a perfume or cosmetics commercial, or even a car commercial, and sexiness which verges on the obscene. Adverts should be suitable for all audiences, including children, religious people, old-fashioned people and prudish people.

                            I do agree with the point which Bob and others here have made that we live in a society fixated with the evils of paedophilia. I don't welcome this at all and it is pleasing that other people agree that this has gone to extremes but people object to nudity for reasons other than child-sex connotations. It is very easy indeed to exclude nakedness from adverts and still make those adverts relevant and appealing, and that's what advertisers should do. If they know in advance that nudity is a go-go area for advertisers, they won't use it. That way they won't risk offending people and there won't be complaints made to the respective regulatory bodies. Problem solved.

                            One last thing and a bit off topic: in the US, the term nappy used by the wrong person can lead to racial issues.
                            I didn't know that, Bob. Here in the UK, if you asked for a pack of diapers in a supermarket, the staff would probably not have a clue what you were talking about. Here, they're called nappies and there's no other term for them. The different meanings attached to words can cause problems to English-speaking transatlantic migrants. A British child would be very likely to walk into a US store and ask, in a loud and confident voice, for a pack of rubbers. He's not intending to have under-age sex - what he wants is a pack of erasers for use in drawing. We call these rubbers.

                            Stu

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I noticed years ago that a naked babys' butt sells almost anything. Now I'm not going in depth hear, but do you need a naked baby to sell arthritis cream, or soap or... I don't necessarily think it's wrong, just stick to diapers, wipes, "baby" shampoo, you know-things a naked baby should sell.
                              Naturush.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X