This blogger’s older brother constantly bombards me with videos, tunes and other memorabilia from the distant past. I’m not sure exactly why he sends me these things, but most end up in my virtual wastebasket. This one containing the ads pictured, however, struck a chord.
As you’ll see, it contains a number of print advertisements from a bygone era. It’s hard to say which is more politically incorrect. But, there’s one ad that, sadly, is as relevant today as it was when it first appeared a half century ago. Let me know if you agree about the ad in question, and we’ll go back-and-forth on why this particular ‘wrong’ is more ‘right’ than ever before.
One other observation: these print ads from yesteryear are amazingly patronizing and condescending towards women. I find it fascinating that today’s advertisements and commercials have come full circle with many, if not, most, equally demeaning to men (i.e. portraying us as dumb, helpless creatures always in need of a woman to show us how to 
survive, etc.).
If you look at ads for detergent, or vehicles, or certain foods from yesteryear they are still “relevant”. Yes, gun control is a social issue but guns are also a part of life for many people. Unless you can prove that a relevant dishwasher ad is in some way shameful as well then the fact that an ad for guns is still relevant doesn’t prove much of anything in my opinion.
All legitimate comments, Laura. But, I was focusing on the gun ad. Sad to say, it’s not only still relevant. It’s more relevant than ever.
I was going where Julie was. When looking at an ad from yester-year, it’s pretty easy to point out the offensive image/text. When I did this assignment, though admittedly my freshman year in high school was many years ago, we pulled out something as simple as a shampoo/makeup ad, analyzing everything on the page, down to the background colors and what they implicated. The body language and look of the models in many cases were suggestive and horrible indicators of what is deemed as “attractive.”
What’s your take on the Lane Bryant ad that was pulled last year? It’s fascinating that it’s OK for Victoria’s Secret ads to be everywhere, but plus-size models are somehow deemed inappropriate? Though underwear ads are a whole different topic . . .
I’ll try and keep Ed from reading your comment, Julie. He’s very proud of his feet and earned a pretty penny from them in his youth. That said, I agree, they are bony and shouldn’t be on display in a workplace setting.
I find boney feet on a man very unattractive.. and impractical… all that clicking and cracking when they walk by in their mandals…
Someone must find them attractive, Julie, or the fashion houses wouldn’t insist on anorexic models. I, for one however, do not. On a related subject, I do know for a fact that when he was a young male foot model, Ed Moed was forced to subsist on a starvation diet to keep his dogs as lean as possible. True story.
I think ads today directed toward women are more covertly de-humanizing than yesteryear. Especially fashion ads which encourage girls and women to diet themselves down to a double zero size so we can all achieve the matchstick legs/big rack “ideal.” Oy.
Tell me, RepMan — do men REALLY find this attractive?
Do tell, Laura. I thought women’s advertising had come full circle. I’m obviously aware of the ‘blue collar’ type ads that still routinely appear in industrial-type publications and continue to de-humanize women, but didn’t realize it was still happening on the mass market level. Can you provide a few examples? Thanks.
Great post. I definitely agree that ads have come “full circle” and are at times, equally demeaning toward both genders. One of the first classes we had as a freshman in high school for a theology course was to discuss and analyze modern magazine ads. Specifically, how the ads of today are still almost as equally as insulting towards women as those from yester-year (you can thank my all-girls HS education for that).
Bingo! Give the lady a Glock! You win, Book. It is indeed the gun ad and how terribly sad that the ‘gun for Christmas’ advertisement is as relevant today as it was then. I’d be surprised if advertiser such as Smith & Wesson doesn’t ‘rediscover’ this hip, retro-looking advert, slap on an NRA logo and run it in mainstream newspapers and magazines this coming holiday season. It would certainly play well in Red States.
OK – I’ll go first and say I hope it’s the gun because if any of these other ads were followed by my husband, I would certainly kill him (although the cocaine for toothache confused me – I guess the numbing action). Most of them are geared toward weight so technically they are all still around, Total, Lane Bryant, etc. I find the post to be hilarious.