Exploiting murder for higher sales is OK, as long as it’s a guy.

the obamamessiah
Next post

Exploiting murder for higher sales is OK, as long as it’s a guy.

Wrangler’s got a new ad campaign. The tagline is “We are animals”, and apparently, dead people is now considered “edgy”. Here are the ads, apparently running in France:

These ads are more than a little off-putting. Why is looking at people who have been murdered going to make me want to wear their jeans? It’s not sexy, it’s disrespectful and crude, and most definitely in very poor taste. But misogynistic? Apparently so!

According to Vanessa at Feministing, these ads are abhorrent. But only the one featuring a murdered woman is disgusting. The guy? Eh, not so offensive:

Apparently the cowboy jeans company decided to “spice up” their ads a bit: by featuring corpses along with the tagline, “We are animals.” Because, you know, murder is so hot right now. The one after the jump is so disturbing (trigger warning) that I honestly felt like I might throw up. I don’t think I’ve ever seen the sexualization of violence against women so disturbingly portrayed on an ad before.

See, only the one featuring a murdered woman makes her want to throw up. Only the murdered woman is disturbing. The murdered male is not nearly as important. Of course, the male ad seems to indicate more violence than the female ad does. The male’s jeans are ripped and torn, and besides just being wet, are stained with some kind of darker residue — blood? mud? — which isn’t exactly clear. It screams murder. The female ad, however, does not seem to depict death quite as much. It’s a little more ambiguous. Her body is stiff, her arm is flexed, and it’s a little hard to tell whether she’s dead or just… swimming topless through a dirty creek. She even appears to be semi-erect, with her head clearly raised at a higher angle than her back and legs. She’s clean, aside from the mud, and there are no rips on her jeans, nor blood or bruises to immediately indicate violence. Is she dead or alive? It’s a little bit tougher to tell than in the male ad, where he seems to quite obviously be a corpse.

But it’s the female ad which is offensive because of the indication of violence, not the male ad, even though the male ad seems to portray a more violent picture than the female ad. So what are the point here? That exploiting murder for profit is OK as long as it’s a guy? Classy, Feministing. Real classy.

There’s also some delicious irony in the complaining of feminists about violence perpetrated against humans, given that they’re all pro-choice. I guess that doesn’t count as violence in their eyes. But that’s another post for another day.

Written by

6 Comments
  • philmon says:

    Flippin’ sick, the whole thing. Disgusting.

    And they can leave me out of their “we”.

    Who thought this was a good idea?

  • philmon says:

    As far as the feministers, they, like most second and third generation activists, suffer from issue-myopia. (Yeah, I just now made that term up).

    They are so busy looking for anything related to their pet issue to be outraged about that not only do they not see anything outside of their official narrative, the myopia distorts their view to the point that their morning scrambled eggs can be construed as an example of violence against women if you give them a few seconds to think about it.

  • Deborah says:

    All I could think when I watched the ads was, give me a break. They were absolutely silly.I would be much more likely to buy their product if I could actually see the product on somebody’s (living) body. All this victim mentality is indeed wearing very, very thin.

  • Rob Farrington says:

    What philmon said. I couldn’t put it any better or add anything else really, except that someone should be seized by his ponytail and given a half-hour lesson in ‘Common Sense’, and then another one in ‘Morals’.

    ‘Issue-myopia’ – I like that term! Mind if I steal it and use it some time?

  • CaptDMO says:

    “trigger warning”
    Says it all for me.
    And you’re giving Fe****ting, and the like, “ink” because…..?

  • Ironwolf32 says:

    “Wrangler, We are animals.” Personally, I think the slogan in itself could work. But their presentation doesn’t make any sense.

    Will the jeans out live you? No, because they are shredded at the cuffs. They are great and comfortable until they kill you???

    It gives so many wrong impressions. The last thing I am thinking of is dead bodies when I hear, “We are animals”.

    Just off the top of my head, I came up with for new “We are animals” ads:
    1. A guy wearing Wranglers on a mountaintop howling at the moon representing a wolf.
    2. A woman wearing Wranglers patting a superimposed male lion on the Serengeti.
    3. A man or a women with Wranglers on running around with a herd of horses…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead