Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hunky Dory girls are back

1…457910

Comments

  • #182
    120_Minutes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,706 ✭✭✭120_Minutes


    Alopex wrote: »


    Strange the ones with looks and intellect generally use their intellect to get by.


    This poses a problem, if a stunningly beautiful woman realises that opening a few buttons on her blouse and showing off "the girls" will get her served quicker at the bar is she using her looks, her intellect or both?


    Back to the ad, has no one noticed the irony that an ad for an Irish company promoting an Irish sport has been cast by women who've probably never set foot in this country?

    Where's all our home grown honeys....Claire Tully and Salpia on holidays again?


  • #183
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Everyone's entitled to their opinion - but to ban ads like this in 2011? Madness.

    Where do we stop? We should then ban Sex and the City which objectify men as baby producers? All those programmes about my embarrassing body? All those "ibiza uncovered" documentaries? Pretty much anything with Jordan / Katie Price in it?

    I recognise just because I find something distasteful or inappropriate that other people might not and must enjoy it. Most of the fun of these ads is that they are going to annoy people :D

    There's lots of stuff out there that annoys me on TV and the media but to ban these ads of attractive young women in humorous situations? Why?


  • #184
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    JDD wrote: »
    a) Noted

    b) Also noted. Since I had nothing to add I assume you all agreed to disagree and left it at that.

    Yeah well on your diet coke comment a bunch of ads were mentioned that use naked males.
    LeeHoffmann wrote: »
    I get your frustration but, in all fairness, I wouldn't expect anybody to read the entire 12 pages just so they can offer an opinion, er...opinion guy.

    True. But whenever I preface a comment in thread with 'i havne't rad the thread' I accept that my comment is going to be already covered, someone might abuse me and someone else will contradict me. Usually I will just say - oh fair enough so - recognising I've stuck my nose into a topic without doing the necessary background reading


  • #185
    flutterflye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,538 ✭✭✭flutterflye


    There's only 5 pages.


  • #186
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    I want crisps... I mean sex. I mean sex with crisps... no not with crisps, crisps after sex or maybe before.

    Ahfugeddaboudit.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Alopex wrote: »
    Strange the ones with looks and intellect generally use their intellect to get by.

    If they are really intelligent they use WHATEVER WORKS to get by. As would any intelligent man.
    Alopex wrote: »
    I am not saying they are mutually exclusive. I am saying the video on that site portrays women as air-heads and being an air-head isn't a problem when you look good. These women knew that when taking part but thought the money was worth it

    So the coca cola ad doesn't portray men in the same way? Actually in my opinion the "Because I'm worth it" or the "here comes the science" in beauty product ads portray women much more as airheads - the first since it's a shameless appeal to woman's vanity to get her to spend over the odds and the second since the "science" is pretty much always absolute rubbish http://thesciencebit.net/2011/08/18/no-you-are-not-worth-it/#more-1678.

    Why do they use extremely attractive young generally very thin women to advertise cosmetics and fashion to other women? Is this not sexist and ageist and encouraging eating disorders?

    I certainly don't think every time I see an attractive woman "she must be stupid" ....


  • #188
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    flutterflye wrote: »
    There's only 5 pages.


    There ....are..... FOUR ......lights!!!!!


  • #189
    JDD
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭JDD


    I'm just embarrassed that an advert this unoriginal causes people around the whole country to bitch and moan or exclaim "great marketing! sex sells!". It's a terribly lazy advertising campaign (in work we were sent the 2012 calender today, which has pics of last year's rugby ads) but our reaction as a nation is the real puzzle. Is a group of scantily-clad females really that shocking or eye-catching, in 2011?

    Are we really that backwards to either want to call Joe Duffy about this 'outrage' or are we really dumb enough that we'll praise any advertising campaign that just shoves a giant pair of tits in a national paper alongside a meaningless slogan (last year's "are you staring at my crisps?", which contained no image of a crisp bag).

    In answer to your questions;
    a) Are we dumb enough to praise any advertising campaign that has a meaningless giant pair of tits? - Yes I guess is the answer to that, given the success of the previous rugby campaign, which translated into actual sales. I would wager that the increase in sales was more to do with people reacting to the controversy that the campaign itself.

    b) Should we be "outraged"? - No, too strong a word. We should be outraged at the famine in Somalia or the corruption in government - this campaign does not, and should not come under the definition of public outrage.

    Is it an interesting talking point on an issue that has wider implications? I think so. Put it this way - ask yourself these few questions;

    1. Do you believe that society (including media, general public and product producers) put a disproportionate emphasis on how a woman looks as a measure of self worth? Yes/No?
    2. Do you believe that this dispropotionate emphasis may hamper a woman's motivation to achieve in other areas of her life, and may increase result in a lack of perceived self worth if they do not fit into the ideal mould? Yes/No?
    3. Do you believe that overtly sexualised images of women in media contribute to this disproportionate emphasis? Yes/No?
    4. Do you think that voicing disapproval of overtly sexualised images will result in less images appearing, or will draw undue attention to those images thus encouraging more of them?

    Is the ad worthy of outrage? No. Is it worthy of debate? I think so, yes.


  • #190
    Raekwon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,535 ✭✭✭Raekwon


    Sc@recrow wrote: »
    Kelly is fantastic....miles better than that Salpa lass or any of the other ones..

    Yeah she is smoking hot, but obviously not Irish though (same as Salpa). They put her name as Kelly Murphy on the website but her real name is Isabela Soncini and she is a model from Brazil.


  • #191
    Feeona
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Feeona


    professore wrote: »

    There's lots of stuff out there that annoys me on TV and the media but to ban these ads of attractive young women in humorous situations? Why?

    Who wants to ban the ad? All I heard about the ad campaign is that the advertising authority have apparently received a 'handful of complaints' about it, and that information was probably put about by Hunky Dorys themselves.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Where's the hunk-y dorys?

    He's Hunky Dory! :D

    I wanna manly flesh!


  • #193
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLp5m9PiQQ0


    I love men's fragrance ads!!!


  • #194
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    JDD wrote: »
    In answer to your questions;
    a) Are we dumb enough to praise any advertising campaign that has a meaningless giant pair of tits? - Yes I guess is the answer to that, given the success of the previous rugby campaign, which translated into actual sales. I would wager that the increase in sales was more to do with people reacting to the controversy that the campaign itself.

    But wait a minute here. I haven't head anyone praising the ad becuase it has a huge pair of tits. If anything it gets praised as it is humourous. I mean that is the point - the model type getting down and dirty on the rugby/gaa pitch. If you can see past the tits it is actually humerous (I wouldn't go so far as to say funny)
    Is it an interesting talking point on an issue that has wider implications? I think so. Put it this way - ask yourself these few questions;

    1. Do you believe that society (including media, general public and product producers) put a disproportionate emphasis on how a woman looks as a measure of self worth? Yes/No?
    2. Do you believe that this dispropotionate emphasis may hamper a woman's motivation to achieve in other areas of her life, and may increase result in a lack of perceived self worth if they do not fit into the ideal mould? Yes/No?
    3. Do you believe that overtly sexualised images of women in media contribute to this disproportionate emphasis? Yes/No?
    4. Do you think that voicing disapproval of overtly sexualised images will result in less images appearing, or will draw undue attention to those images thus encouraging more of them?

    Honestly ? In 2011 I don't feel that any of this is different for men or women. Now maybe there is an age differential - I think for the older generation these stereotypes may still hold true, but I think for young people men are expected just as much as women to conform to expectations of beauty.


  • #195
    Eve_Dublin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,884 ✭✭✭Eve_Dublin


    Galtee wrote: »
    I love honest comments like this because just for a while you ladies forget the charade and climb down off your high horse and show us men what we already know which is that, fundamentally you're just like we are :)

    Notice I'm not moaning or complaining about men's driving or calling you all Mascunazis or whatever as I'm actually riding someone and don't have some vendetta against the male population like you so obviously do. God love you really...

    P.S: Ehh and you're the one compounding the differences, buddy...not me so what the hell are you on about? Lolzers.


  • #196
    Kintarō Hattori
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,084 ✭✭✭✭Kintarō Hattori


    I'm delighted that an Irish company has the nerve to produce a series of adverts like this. I know it's great publicity for them but in a world of increasing political correctness it's refreshing.

    I find them to be brilliant fun and really don't see the harm. There's no violence, no nudity and no bad language. They are appealing to their market.


  • #197
    Eve_Dublin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,884 ✭✭✭Eve_Dublin


    darklighter wrote: »
    Do you actually think the complaints made to the advertising watchdog were made by a man? And from reading the thread, it seems to be mostly females complaining.

    I was talking about this thread and the airing men (not women) are giving the topic here.

    Well your perception is wrong. When I posted that comment, not ONE female complained but 3 females (me being one) complained about men like you...men who imagined females complaining that didn't actually exist!

    You really need to get your facts straight before you post or you look as ridiculous and reactionary.


  • #198
    Eve_Dublin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,884 ✭✭✭Eve_Dublin


    jaffacakesyum wrote: »
    +1

    So did I

    I'm a woman and couldn't care less about this ad. I think men on here WANT women to be offended by things like this so they can make comments like the above :rolleyes:

    I haven't seen one woman complain but apparently the thread is swamped with us.


  • #199
    Feeona
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Feeona


    JDD wrote: »
    It might put me off the brand though. I really like their buffalo flavour but since the previous rugby campaign I've bought it less and I might avoid it completely after this latest stunt.

    It's put me off the brand. I don't buy their products anymore. McCoys are waaaayyyyy nicer so no loss


  • #200
    Eve_Dublin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,884 ✭✭✭Eve_Dublin


    Sc@recrow wrote: »
    looks at crotch "whew...it's still there"

    You missed the sarcastic tones obviously. That was the point I'm making...thread started by men with mainly male posters and with many male posters complaining about non-existant, complaining female posters...if ye get me.


  • #201
    JDD
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭JDD


    Honestly ? In 2011 I don't feel that any of this is different for men or women. Now maybe there is an age differential - I think for the older generation these stereotypes these things may still hold true, but I think for young people men are expecting just as much as women to conform to expectations of beauty.

    Really? My friends are mostly male and have a hugely more healthy view of themselves than my female friends. They're certainly not dieting, plucking their eyebrows, dyeing their hair or waxing unattractive body hair or any of the other regular abolutions women perform. I only know of two guys who go to the gym in order to look a certain way, and one of them is gay. It's probably because they're not bombarded with expectations on how they should look. Flick through a men's magazine and you might find a section on fashion, politics, film and book reviews and an interview with a female model or actress. Flick through a woman's magazine and you'll find it's mostly comprised of clothes that will "flatter your shape" (i.e. make you look thinner), make up to make you look prettier, perfume ads, a review of a new diet or exercise regime, and an interview with a couple of celebrities who, if female, will be asked about their diet and beauty secrets and the "pressure" to stay thin.

    Let me just make another small example. High heels. When you look at them, they're the most ridiculous piece of attire. Uncomfortable, bad for your back, can make your feet bleed on occasion. And yet nearly every woman owns a pair and many wear them on a daily, if not permanent basis. Why? Because we are told that it makes our legs look longer, and men like long legs. Nobody even blinks an eyelid - they are part of our 2011 culture

    There is nothing that men do on a daily basis, that is physically painful or uncomfortable in order to make themselves more attractive to women. Why? Because they know that women are attracted to a number of traits, rather than the major part being whether the bloke fits into a certain physical mould.

    Now, some would say that women are just as shallow - being majorily attracted to the size of a man's wallet, and media reflects wealth being the ideal attractive trait for a man, but that's another debate.
    But wait a minute here. I haven't head anyone praising the ad becuase it has a huge pair of tits. If anything it gets praised as it is humourous. I mean that is the point - the model type getting down and dirty on the rugby/gaa pitch.

    If that's the case the models could quite easily have been wearing the actual GAA rig out and the same outcome would have been achieved. The point of putting them into bikini versions is to titilate. Actually, that wasn't the point. The point of putting them into the bikini versions is to create controversy, turning the debate into mental feminists vs liberal males. Either way, it's insulting to our intelligence.


  • Advertisement
  • #202
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    JDD wrote: »
    I'm sure this has all been mentioned before, but I think the ads are unimaginative

    If Hunky Dory ran ads like those in the Guinness hay day more people wouldn't buy their product because their ads were artistic and challenging.

    The primary function of any ad is generate awareness of the product and brand, that's it. This ad is doing very well.

    No point in pointing out that it's clearly not imaginative when it doesn't need to be, and if it was it would have no extra advantage beyond appealing to a limited group of people who wouldn't change their mind about the product anyway.

    and the whole rehash of the previous campaign specifically to cause controversy, and therefore increase the brand profile, too obviously manipulative.

    All advertising is manipulative. It's the main function of advertising.
    It might put me off the brand though. I really like their buffalo flavour but since the previous rugby campaign I've bought it less and I might avoid it completely after this latest stunt.

    Commendable i have to say. Most people won't change their consumer practices at all....for any reason.


  • #203
    Paparazzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,397 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    The big question here is, will the rape statistics shoot up like after the last campaign?


  • #204
    up for anything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,790 ✭✭✭up for anything


    The only reason Hunky Dorys' share of the market has gone up is because they dropped the price of their crisps for the last year. They have been on special offer constantly for the last year. When I've been broke I've bought them rather than my favourite Tayto because they were more affordable. Nothing to do with boobs.

    However, if Dennys ran ads for their hotdogs and sausages showing men wearing Speedo trunks outlining their meat and two veg it would put me off eating their products. :D


  • #205
    JDD
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭JDD


    It's less the manipulative nature of the campaign that I have a problem with, I realise that every advertiser plays on some sort of need/insecurity to sell their products. Nor do I disagree that sex sells. I mean, they could put a 30 second porno clip on the tv and stick a picture of the crisps on at the end and that might result in a huge increase in sales. It doesn't mean that it's acceptable.

    I just don't like seeing overtly sexualised images in public. That applies to either sex, but since I'm female, and I am of the opinion that women are overly obsessed with their physical attractiveness, I especially don't like seeing women portrayed that way. That's my point.


  • #206
    MitchKoobski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭MitchKoobski


    Thats next week's photoshop competition sorted anyway http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74224901&postcount=80


  • #207
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    They don't seem to understand the rules of GAA.

    Why is she chesting the ball? She can catch it!

    CATCH IT YOU SILLY WOMAN!!!


  • #208
    Eve_Dublin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,884 ✭✭✭Eve_Dublin


    In all honesty, this ad doesn't make me think of crisps or getting jiggy with a lady as I've my own pair of boobaloobs to look at and women don't make me chedder myself and I'd be feigning anger if I said they offended me...it simply makes me think of Gaelic Football! I was lucky enough to go to the semi-finals last week but unfortunately I'm flying back to Spain and obviously there's no chance I'll get home for the final but...

    UP THE DUBS!!! THE SAM IS COMING HOME!

    Can't wait :o


  • #209
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    JDD wrote: »
    Really? My friends are mostly male and have a hugely more healthy view of themselves than my female friends. They're certainly not dieting, plucking their eyebrows, dyeing their hair or waxing unattractive body hair or any of the other regular abolutions women perform. I only know of two guys who go to the gym in order to look a certain way, and one of them is gay. It's probably because they're not bombarded with expectations on how they should look. Flick through a men's magazine and you might find a section on fashion, politics, film and book reviews and an interview with a female model or actress. Flick through a woman's magazine and you'll find it's mostly comprised of clothes that will "flatter your shape" (i.e. make you look thinner), make up to make you look prettier, perfume ads, a review of a new diet or exercise regime, and an interview with a couple of celebrities who, if female, will be asked about their diet and beauty secrets and the "pressure" to stay thin.

    Thats your experience. Has it occured to you that as you are female they may not be sharing their insecurities with you ? I mean if you felt your boobs were small and you were really insecure about it would you discuss it with your guy friends. Most guys aspire to a certain physique even if they don't admit it to you - 6 pack and muscles. Alot of older teenagers and twenty something guys would hit the gym to build this look. As to the mens magazines thing you have got to be kidding me - when was the last time you looked at a mens magazine - they are full of as many 6 packs as boobs. Hell Mens' Health is a prime example that is to be found in every news agents mag rack - not only is every cover plastered in rippling abs but half the articles are about how to get ripped and appeal to women (because men buy it in volume enough to support it): http://www.menshealth.com/
    And personally I can say I've had girls tell me straight out and blunlty I need to lose weight and muscle up to get the girls (I'm not huge or anything)
    In the workplace I've even seen women in authority using that position to ogle, sneer or proposition men lower down the chain than them.
    Let me just make another small example. High heels. When you look at them, they're the most ridiculous piece of attire. Uncomfortable, bad for your back, can make your feet bleed on occasion. And yet nearly every woman owns a pair and many wear them on a daily, if not permanent basis. Why? Because we are told that it makes our legs look longer, and men like long legs. Nobody even blinks an eyelid - they are part of our 2011 culture

    I have frequent told women I know with back problems to stop wearing heels - they invariably say "but they look better'. Men don't come into it. Women believe that high heels make them better looking. Other women reinforce that. (FYI - many women look too tall in heels - that in itself will put men off)
    There is nothing that men do on a daily basis, that is physically painful or uncomfortable in order to make themselves more attractive to women. Why? Because they know that women are attracted to a number of traits, rather than the major part being whether the bloke fits into a certain physical mould.
    You confuse apathy with lazyness. Moreso this is just chance - there just doesn't happen to be a fad for men to do sometihng painful everyday (although personally I hate shaving daily). If women suddenly only fancy really tall men how long before men start wearign high heels ? If JedwardBeckham wore high heels you'd find tonnes of teenage boys wearing them .........:P
    If that's the case the models could quite easily have been wearing the actual GAA rig out and the same outcome would have been achieved. The point of putting them into bikini versions is to titilate. Actually, that wasn't the point. The point of putting them into the bikini versions is to create controversy, turning the debate into mental feminists vs liberal males. Either way, it's insulting to our intelligence.

    No I disagree. The ad would not be funny if they were wearing full on jerseys. It would just be weird - it wouldn't work. They put them in Bikinis because its absurd. Yes its sexy, but thats why its absurd.
    JDD wrote: »
    I just don't like seeing overtly sexualised images in public. That applies to either sex, but since I'm female, and I am of the opinion that women are overly obsessed with their physical attractiveness, I especially don't like seeing women portrayed that way. That's my point.

    But they aren't overly sexual. Yes the women are gorgeous, but they aren't in sexual poses are they ? They're not fellating an ice-cream as you tend to see in ice cream ads. They aren't hip thrusting like you see women doing in Lynx's adverts for example. They're beautiful women all right, wearing revealing clothes - but they aren't in sexual poses.

    As a matter of interest - how do you feel about beach volleyball ? Is it a sport or an oogle fest ? THose women dress very similar
    Eve_Dublin wrote: »
    women don't make me chedder myself
    :eek:
    Lovely choice of words.....where's the vomit smiley ?:p


  • #210
    panda100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭panda100


    Used to love Hunky Dorys, but haven't brought them since those rugby ad's. Disgusting, that they're now trying to degarde women's gaa as well.


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    Eve_Dublin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,884 ✭✭✭Eve_Dublin


    I wish these crap ads weren't associated with my beloved GAA, to be honest. I don't find them offensive as such but I find them tacky and shoddy. GAA was always something simple and straight-forward for me. I've a photograph of last week's match of some little girls on the pitch waving the flag of their county. GAA is a family sport. I've been going with my family since I was 4 years old and my mother was passionate about the game (she died when I was 11). I'm from Dublin and I suppose as I only get a taste of how engrained GAA culture is elsewhere. These ads are inappropriate for a family audience and I don't see any association with the kind of buzz you find there. It seems like the company and the models don't understand that and are trying their best to trivialise and make a tacky farce out of something that means so much to young and old people around the country. Its an amateur sport and it's something that's genuinely enjoyed by it's fans purely for the love of the game. These ads do it no favours.

    By the way, I'm not some howler and I'm not envious. Envy is definitely not what I feel. As man-fancying female, I inevitably don't see the artistic merit of these ads or the appeal to their female target market but I understand that's not what it's about...but why are they tainting the GAA? That's probably the only thing that truely bugs me....latch on to something with less impact on whole families, both young and old who'll see them. Don't cheapen something so drenched in real passion for the sport alone.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement