- Michael M.: Too much going on. Life in flux, etc..
- Sunshine: Wow, I was soooo happy to see a new post in my rss reader. I was hopping this is already the comeback! :(...
- gandalf: Did you only get caffeine through Dr.p or did you drink coffee as well? I’m interested, since...
- neeka: nine kilos… wow… :) happy holidays to you, michael, and to all your loved ones! veronica
- m: It was a bargain. No strings attached.
Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Maribor, Slovenia.
Portoroz, Slovenia.
• AlienMelon
• Burger.si
• Heck
• Izklop
• si.blogs
• Sloblogi
• Blogorola
• Natalija Verboten
GEO magazine really wants to penetrate the Slovenian market.
Just when you thought Slovenian billboards couldn’t go any further, the German science & nature magazine GEO arrived and upped the ante with their full-blast penetration advertisements. These things really put the nice in science.
Do they work, though? Beyond getting attention, I mean. Do people tell their friends: "Dude, I just subscribed to that new magazine, GEO! I normally don’t like nature and stuff, but when I saw people doing the tripod on those billboards I just knew it was right for me!"
The other important question is: Where does this slippery slope end? How far is too far? These guys, for example, could probably work some tentacle porn into their ads — would people care? Will the next generation?
It’s quite fascinating to watch how far agencies are pushing the envelope here. And it’s amazing (to me) that they clearly haven’t hit any boundaries yet. You can only wonder what’s coming next.
Comments
Comments for this post are closed.
I’ve noticed that Michael often gets (mildy) offended by supposedly “offensive” ads and billboards. It seems that he brought that American ban-everything mentality with him to Slovenia. Fortunately, Slovenia is not yet so “moral” a country where sex is considered more dangerous than carrying guns. Of course, we are headed that way and it’s only a matter of time, but fortunately we are not quite there yet. I think this GEO ad is harmless. I suppose they counted on some sort of scandal and free publicity that comes with it, but getting no reaction is, in my opinion, the best reaction Slovenia could give. It’s only sex. Sex is going on all the time. Relax. Chill out. Have a beer. Enjoy the spring and for that matter, go have sex yourself. (no pun here!)
Offended isn’t the right word. I get surprised by them, just because they would be so absolutely unthinkable in the U.S. I certainly don’t have a "ban everything" mentality — you’ll notice that I never suggest anything about taking them down, or that they’re a disgrace or anything. After all, if I was the type to be offended by them, I certainly wouldn’t post them on my site.
Well, I’m sure Michael is not offended by these billboards, but I have to agree that the frequency of sex-related ads is surprising. I mean - do “kreativci” (people in creative agencies) have no imagination left? OK, so it’s a science magazine. And yes, the billboard does raise a few eyebrows and yes, I do like it. (taking the magic out of having sex and all). But I agree with Michael. Where does it all lead to? We’re two steps shy of being surrounded by boobs everywhere. Not that I mind that. But I’d rather have a couple of nice boobs in my hands that a million of them on billboards.
I liked the ad when I saw it. Very nice. However those kAmasUtra quotes on the ‘tripod’ are even better. Now, that kind of science, ancient and modern, we like.
And what do the tentacle rapes have to do with any of this? Does it seem to you they are a natural progression from this point?
To quote Pengovsky: "Where does it all lead to?" MY QUESTIONS: Does sex (still) sell? Even/Also/Most of all in Slovenia? So why are NAKED MEN so rarely to be seen?
Because phallic imagery IS offensive? How much of it is good for the children? Do women react to the omnipresent boobs and crotches and go buy the thing? I really agree that the topic is worth discussing and thinking about. It would almost seem that in Slovenia "anything goes". On the other hand, GEO could safely claim that their ad is an informative one (vs. a manipulative/pornographic one), especially if compared to Playboy.
I too sensed moral note in Michael’s writing on subjects such as this one. But why "hide" sex? Why not show sex is good? It is, isn’t it? It is natural. I like the GEA ad as it ignores taboos and would always support statements which go against baseless morals. But will always be against exploitation of women in ads by which I do not only mean Playboy ads but Ariel or whichever washing powder ad as well.
@alcessa: I was about to ask that same question… Sex obviously sells. I think of myself as a sick perverted bastard, but the multitude of “I-so-want-to-make-you-horny” semi-nudity, which is available everywhere - from Ariel ads to MTV videos is appaling.
As far as male nudity is concerned: Yes, I did present only my sick and perverted point of view as phalic images do it for me
But I guess it cuts both ways. As if “kreativci” really had no better idea.
@Odisej: Granted - baseless morals indeed. But we KNOW that. Why then to force the message? We all know sex is good. And most people age 15 and older know how procreation is perfomred and that it pleasurable. So what’s new in GEO?
Oh, bollocks! Please read “as phalic imagies DON’T do it for me” :)))) a Freudian slip I guess
When will this end?
My guess is, by the time the people will get bored of such advertising and it will seize to draw attention.
It seems to me, that bigger question will be, what is coming to shock us next.
@Pengovsky: I know, you know, a lot of us know but we had to find out somehow. And that is the point. What seems so obvious to us does not to so many other teenagers, even adults. I remember an anecdote of a quite well know mother of seven from Ljubljana who only at her later age found out that she was cheated out of pleasure in sex. She did not speak to her husband for quite a while. Now, if only she would read GEO.
@ Pengovsky: Please read "as phalic imagies DON’T do it for me" :)))) Well … yes .. I may be able to, but NOT YET
:-D… Not till I have had my share of laughing, thank you. From what you say about yourself, it can be concluded that (non-phallic :-)) sex sells things to men, mostly. At the same time, it is a truism that purchases are in most cases decided upon by women. Even for things men need. So who are all these women-adorned ads aimed at? Women wishing themselves to be perceived as sexually attractive as their flashy billboard counterparts?
“So who are all these women-adorned ads aimed at? Women wishing themselves to be perceived as sexually attractive as their flashy billboard counterparts?”
Alcessa, there is some truth in that, actually. It’s called narcissistic identification.
Poulette, thanks, that explains a lot.
It also causes me to wonder how let’s say a slightly overweight, definitely thirtyish woman, almost without self-related illusions, should identify with all those perfect images. But this is an old topic. And I am not really asking for an answer this time
Well,at least they’ve put some creativity in it: certainly much better than the Playboy addvertisment from some months ago.
But this shows their laziness: it’s diffficoult to address different focus groups, so they use the only thing that all people have in common: their (our) interest in sex.
Lack of imagination.
@Alcessa: Do you remember the ad for Malizia deodorant for men? When a gorgeous woman kicks the male would-be-sex-divinity out of her flat saying “What kind of a man are you if you’re not using Malizia?” I was in high school at the time and 95% percent of my male schoolmates rushed out to buy Malizia.
Taking into account what Poulette said, I guess that billboard-women sell to both men and women. But the issue we started with is wider than that. Why on Earth must almost every ad hint (in an most obvious manner) at sex? Or in case of detergent ads (and simmilar): to reaffirm the male-dominanted society patterns where she does the laundry and/or cleans the bathroom, takes the kids to school and takes Actimel in the process.
@Odisej: The ads obviously play to our most basic instintcs, but perhaps that is the catch. By making sex omnipresent they make it a consumer good - which it obviously is not. And then you have cases such as the aforementioned mother, who had to go through seven children to find out sex can be gratifying. And mind you - GEO is not a sex-education magazine. That’s the whole problem. The ad in question is there only to make a stir.
Well, May Day has passed and now it’s Make Hay Day. Welcome back, Michael, from your restful days
I don’t really have the time to enter into a long debate on this, but for what it’s worth, my feminist side "disapproves" of ads where the female is show as nothing more than an object offered up to the male gaze, thereby reproducing and reaffirming the existing patriarchal patterns in society, yadda, yadda, yadda. That said, I don’t see how GEA would fall into that category -here the female (and male) object are somehow equal in the sense that the "scientific" diagram serves to strip them of their individual sexuality. Finally, I can’t really say whether it bothers me or not - it goes a bit too far in terms of shock value but it’s kind of fun and it’s not demeaning to women like 99% of other advertisements around today.
It is all a part of a cunning plan, where the Slovenians wil be completely desensitized to nudity, men and women will walk around bare-chested in the summer, copulating in public. Finally, Slovenia will become the most famous European sex tourism spot. Hallelujah!
Hmmm… but this is pretty normal, really, in most of continental Europe. I was, however, surprised, at a poster found all over Ireland - and paid for by (the youth branch of) a fairly traditionalist political party, Fine Gael, at that, a few years ago, to promote a “yes” vote in (i think the repeat) referendum on the EU Nice Treaty. Picture of a couple snogging, above the slogan “It’s better off when you’re inside”.
In Ireland. Imagine.
Or it is actually a cunning plan of the German and Slovenian governments: they are showing us how you actually make future taxpayers…
Sex sells stuff, that’s the bottom line. If sex didn’t sell things so well, it wouldn’t be associated with so many things in ads. That sort of ads insult my inteligence, that’s why i simply don’t buy the stuff they’r trying to push.
I like it…
It makes very clear that t least physically, men and woman complete each other
I don’t mind it. It is a science and nature magazine after all, right? If they’d similarly pictured two animals on the billboard, would anyone be raising a fuss? I wonder. And with that being said, Alcessa may have a point: perhaps they are giving the not-so-subtle reminder that Slovenia’s population is on the decline (and how one should rectify that..I didn’t happen to notice a condom in the picture — not that I was looking THAT closely, mind you..)