Dolce & Gabbana angry at advertising campaign controversy in Spain

Who says that a woman is a mindless sex machine if she wants to have rough sex, or vouyeristic sex? Does that make her a sl*t? Sexual fantasies involving "r*pe" or ones with violent/dominating undertones are actually quite common for both men and women. I think that is what makes the advertisement so disturbing for some. It taps into a part of the psyche that most people are uncomfortable acknowledging. But judging by the numer of people who think it's "hot", it can also be sexually arousing.
 
In that case, why do we need to sell clothing with anything? We can just have mannequins or girls standing around. It's a creative decision on the designer's part. Why did we need to sell Carmen Kass's pubic hair to see Gucci? Why do we need girls in a forest to sell perfume? It's an advertisement selling not only clothing but an aesthetic. That's D&G's aesthetic. Not everyone likes it (the clothing or the adverts), obviously, but it is their creative choice. I would hate to be a designer doing something provacative that I felt was appropriate for my brand only to be told it was being banned or censored.
 
dolce always uses these overly kinky ad campaigns. i was less disturbed cuz atleast it was a departure from the 70s bathhouse style hmoeroticas.
 
^^ But then again, what if this advertisement is seen by children who can't understand it?
 
yeah--but none of the d&g asds should ever be seen by children.
 
We can just have mannequins or girls standing around

I think that sounds like good advertising. It's the product I am buying, not the aesthetic. I think people who buy to the aesthetic are being fooled.
 
If a child is reading Vogue or some other high fashion magazine, it's obvious they had to get it from their parents or someone else. I've never seen an 8 year old spending their money on Vogue Italia (well, I'm sure there are kids like that, Justin from Ugly Betty? lol). It's up to parents to make sure their kids don't spend their time looking at offensive material, not the government's. As for large public advertising like billboards, isn't it up the city to decide who advertises and who doesn't? There's a big uproar in my city right now over a strip club wanting to build a huge billboard alongside the freeway. People are asking the city not to grant them the zoning rights.

EDIT: But oh yeah, part of the controversy is that the city cannot censor the content of the billboard. They can only choose or not choose to allow them to build it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^ Do you think it's right to ban advertising like that (billboards etc)?
 
WhiteLinen said:
^ And why do we need to sell clothing with that?

why do we need to sell clothing with anything? why do Jcrew ads show people frolicking on the beach? Why do DKNY ads show yound trendy people in the city? Why do brooks brothers ads show people at the country club?

ads don't just sell clothes, they appeal to who and what people want to be, and how they see themselves. For any group of people who want to be a certain way, there will be advertsing that plays on that. And if some people want ot be sex objects, then ads will be created to appeal to those people
 
stilettogirl84 said:
why do we need to sell clothing with anything? why do Jcrew ads show people frolicking on the beach? Why do DKNY ads show yound trendy people in the city? Why do brooks brothers ads show people at the country club?

ads don't just sell clothes, they appeal to who and what people want to be, and how they see themselves. For any group of people who want to be a certain way, there will be advertsing that plays on that. And if some people want ot be sex objects, then ads will be created to appeal to those people

I already replied on that when modelcitizen posed the same question :flower:
 
I believe they can only ask the company to take the billboard down or possible revoke their right to have the billboard in place, but that might start a lawsuit. I don't think you can censor the content of a billboard. If you have a problem, you can bring it up at a city meeting, but I'm not aware of how it works in other countries or possibly other cities/counties in the US.
 
WhiteLinen said:
I already replied on that when modelcitizen posed the same question :flower:

sorry, took me a bit to type it, and by then she'd already said the same thing
 
WhiteLinen said:
I think that (mannequins) sounds like good advertising. It's the product I am buying, not the aesthetic. I think people who buy to the aesthetic are being fooled.

If you see clothes on a mannequin, you may buy it if you were already looking for that type of clothing, or looking for that specific article of clothing.

but the whole point of advertising is to get people to want something or buy something they wouldn't have done otherwise. That's why they create an image. If advertising simply got people to buy things they were already planning on getting, then it wouldn't be very effective.

Obviusly it is foolish to think that an article of clothing can make you something you are not, but not everyone is as levelheaded and logical as you seem to be whitelinen, and advertisements pull on people's emotions and subconcious wants. People buy things based on their emothions sometimes.

If people only bought things when they needed them on a physical level, then the fashion industry would go out of business. Clothes don't wear out in six months, and fashion exists to make people think that they need new clothes about that often. one could argue that this concept is "fooling" people too, but thats another discussion
 
But is it healthy? Do we need that? Why should people be fooled, even if they can't even notice they are being fooled? I think fashion is much more than trends.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,604
Messages
15,190,790
Members
86,511
Latest member
mehmettendik
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->