?

Log in

No account? Create an account
the girl with violets in her lap [userpic]

No seriously though, I really am curious about the targeting of this ad

April 17th, 2011 (09:13 pm)



This ad is primarily geared toward:

Straight-identified women who are (bi)curious about other women
13(15.7%)
Straight-identified men who are (bi)curious about sex with two women
23(27.7%)
...so, straight men, then
27(32.5%)
Bisexual or lesbian women who must only be addressed obliquely in an ad because the idea that women like sex must be kept sekkrit-sekkrit (bi-sekkrit?)
6(7.2%)
Wombats
8(9.6%)
Wow, that's even more illegal than the ad originally was
6(7.2%)

So if it's really an ad for those who are (bi)curious, why didn't they put a man and a woman in the ad, thus ensuring that it would appeal to all bicurious folk?

Because that would look too heterosexual
15(20.8%)
Because, seriously, only geared at straight men
29(40.3%)
Or at those fabled sex-liking women who, like Bigfoot, nevertheless cannot be completely discarded lest they stomp all over your house or something
3(4.2%)
Wait, what?
8(11.1%)
You know what's really bad for your house? Wombats
15(20.8%)
Man, this poll sucks
2(2.8%)

Are you the King of Wishful Thinking?

Yes
13(19.4%)
No
10(14.9%)
I think people who said this poll sucks are the ones who suck, Kylie!
8(11.9%)
I think you shouldn't give people the option to say this poll sucks if you don't want them to tick it, Kylie
3(4.5%)
I think you should stop analyzing newspaper porn and go to bed, Kylie
9(13.4%)
But how will I know whether to call them unless I know whether they service lesbians?
10(14.9%)
...the King of Wishful Thinking?
14(20.9%)


I know, I know. There is in all likelihood no need to worry as long as I can pay their rate.

ETA: Super triple bonus points to anyone who can tell me what that pink thing on the blonde's leg is. It doesn't appear to be a dildo. I'd scan it for you in high-res to give you a better shot at identifying it except for the part where I don't feel like doing that.

Comments

Posted by: nelc (nelc)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:05 am (UTC)

Surely, you can phone them to ask if they service lesbians? Or do these things not work like that?

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:07 am (UTC)

Probably. I'm in a non-poly marriage though and so am not going to check. :)

Posted by: my tongue freezes. (velvet_tipping)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:34 am (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:36 am (UTC)

Posted by: Erin (givesmevoice)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 03:28 am (UTC)
Wayne's World this is awkward...

I...have no idea.

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 03:31 am (UTC)

Have you seen the vid on YouTube with a ten-year-old Lin Manuel Miranda doing "King of Wishful Thinking"? That's why the last question. It's a glorious vid.

Posted by: Erin (givesmevoice)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 03:37 am (UTC)
Little Giants Tad approves

I hadn't, but I just watched a bit of it now and my goodness was he the cutest kid! (I mean, he's still adorable, so it's hardly a shock that he was a cute kid.)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 03:42 am (UTC)

Posted by: Damian (fanboy_of_zeus)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 04:02 am (UTC)

I am about 99% sure that ad is targeted exclusively at men. Though, as a bi-curious mostly-heterosexual man, I have to say...it looks really boring. Or maybe that's just me?

I would guess that bit of pink is either her other leg, or the brunette's other hand?

Posted by: Ches (whitmanschild)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 04:11 am (UTC)
That's so fucking GAY!

The demographic sex-math that happens in my mind when I see this ad:

1) man + woman = looks hetero, makes no sense with the same-sex titillation proffered.

2) man + man = looks gay, maybe hits the bicurious male, possibly does nothing for the bicurious female, the straight man is likely repulsed, the straight woman doesn't see herself invited into that twosome.

3) woman + woman = titllation for the bicurious female, probably the the bicurious male, and almsot certainly the straight male. The only one left out is the straight female.

They could've done a three-fer configuration.

4) man + man + woman = squicks the hetero male and likely female, probably does it for the bicurious of both sexes.

5) man + woman + woman = both bicurious sexes are titillated, the hetero woman probably isn't into it, and the straight male probably doesn't want to join the three, and the dude in the ad then becomes competition.

I think that the female + female setup gets the most bang for the buck, whether the targeted individuals (people who don't openly ID as gay) are either imagining themselves into one of the models, or are joining the models.

Feel free to disagree. I sometimes have odd mental sex-math.

Posted by: -=juldea=- (juldea)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 04:51 am (UTC)
omg!

This comment is excellent and references what I was going to say and then some.

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 12:05 pm (UTC)

For what it's worth, this is exactly what I would come up with, too.

Plus bonus points for calling it "sex math." :)

Also that the three-partner scenario will squick anyone who wasn't looking for more than a twosome, bi-curious or not.

Posted by: Morgan (banshea)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:05 am (UTC)

I'm totally in the it's-for-straight-men camp. I think the "bi curious" thing isn't asking the viewer if he is bi curious, but rather offering the classic "lesbian" fantasy. I think it's meant to read more like, "Would you like to find out more about getting bi curious women like these?"

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 01:51 pm (UTC)

I read it as "bi-curious" in the same way Charlie Sheen calls himself "bi-winning" (wow, I can't believe I'm invoking Charlie Sheen in reasonably serious conversation): curious in two directions -- in this case, about two women. (Incidentally, this is about the most b0rked representation of bisexuality/bicuriosity I've ever seen, no matter which way it's meant! But anyway...) I didn't read the bi as being as much about their tastes as about the fact that there are two of them. But I may be too cynical about the degree to which women's desire is represented/of concern in pornography. ;) Anyway, ultimately I agree with you about whom the ad is directed at, although I wasn't necessarily 100% sold on it until I ran the poll. λ and I were having a conversation about it and couldn't quite come to a consensus.

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 12:02 pm (UTC)
biflash

I think it's ostensibly aimed at women, but in the end it's for men, as usual.

And that it's two very slender stereotypically "porn-pretty" women in classic porn-star getups, making classic porn-star faces, staring at the camera rather than each other... all of which spells pandering to the male gaze. (It could theoretically be the female gaze, but the classic-porn-star aspects pretty blatantly evoke what men are trained to read as sex cues, sort of like the way nearly subliminal sizzling sounds are inserted into hamburger ads.) In the end, it looks to me like it's mostly playing on the "lesbian when men are watching at a party" meme that's supposedly popular with the Kids These Days [tm]. *sigh*

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 01:54 pm (UTC)

Yeah, I was kind of like "...but can't they just buy some cheap student-budget vodka and then head to the nearest BC party?"

Incidentally, I saw your icon (the one above) being used in a comm the other day and it was miscredited because somebody ganked it without credit and then the next person along thought the non-crediter was the one who made it. So I told them to give credit to you and archaica, because it annoyed me. OMG DUN STEEL, PPL :)

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:03 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:20 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:35 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:37 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:42 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:47 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 03:26 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 03:31 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 03:36 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:05 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 06:16 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Damian (fanboy_of_zeus)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:05 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:10 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Damian (fanboy_of_zeus)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:26 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:27 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Damian (fanboy_of_zeus)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:30 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:33 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Damian (fanboy_of_zeus)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:41 pm (UTC)

Posted by: the girl with violets in her lap (slammerkinbabe)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:43 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Damian (fanboy_of_zeus)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 05:50 pm (UTC)

Posted by: -=juldea=- (juldea)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 09:28 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Erbie McInQuack (erbie)
Posted at: April 19th, 2011 07:42 am (UTC)

Posted by: Erbie McInQuack (erbie)
Posted at: April 19th, 2011 07:37 am (UTC)
caw caw

Oh look! I don't have to type all that out because lietya already did. ;)

I was going to say that it's ostensibly aimed at women who are either straight-identified and curious about/open to women or to lesbians, but it's done the way an ad that panders to straight men would be. I'd say it's likely that a straight man put it together thinking that women who are interested in women are the same as men who are interested in women. The picture could as easily be an ad for two women on one man porn, an escort service that offers threesomes, a strip club, or any other service or product that has as its audience men who are interested in (sex with) women.

And there I went and typed it all out anyway. ;)

Posted by: Erbie McInQuack (erbie)
Posted at: April 19th, 2011 07:38 am (UTC)

Posted by: Tasha Rebekah Martin (lietya)
Posted at: April 19th, 2011 07:00 pm (UTC)

Posted by: Hello. (bbsy)
Posted at: April 18th, 2011 02:20 pm (UTC)

lol @ "I love my non-poly wife"

42 Read Comments