Sex Sells, So What?

Growing up I remember hearing sex sells and Bordo reaffirmed this statement by acknowledging that a well known designer, Calvin Klein believes this to be true (Bordo, 180). As a young child, this concept made absolutely no sense but analyzing the advertisement world in a more mature perspective, it is clear that this cliché is definitely true. Many if not majority of ads seen daily are sexual in some way. Whether that sexual connotation is insanely obvious or whether the ad is more subliminal and appeals more to the subconscious mind. If sex in advertisement brings effective profits, why is there such controversy over sexually depicted ads in the media? One might argue that if it works, why not continue this popular method? I say sure if it works use it WHEN NECESSARY. It annoys me that many ads are just overtly sexual. Granted, some ads should be sexual if the product being sold has something to do with sex. Such as personal lubricants or condoms for example. Take a look at the ad to the left. The product being sold is a condom. It makes sense for the ad to feature an attractive male with a look of sexual ecstasy on his face.

Now take a gander at the ad down below. This is also a condom ad. This too is understandable on why the prints in the sand would represent an incredibly large penis in an effort to attract particular consumers.

As a consumer and a “victim” of advertisements as well, I would not be offended that Trojan and Durex decided to use sexuality as a gimmick.

Now take a look at the ads below.

Before looking at this ad from a more analytic point of view, just noticing the positions of the models, you would think that the point of this ad is to promote orgies. This Dolce and Gabbana ad is using sex to sell a purse. There is unnecessary sexual connation in this particular ad. Why not use one of the many equally, if not more efficient methods of advertising? How come a non sexual product is commonly associated with an extremely sexual ad? The logic does not make sense to me.

Someone might ask what is my point? So what if advertisers decide to use a sexual ad to sell a potentially non sexual product? What is the big deal? I thought the exact same thing until I dug a little deeper and found ads that legitimately answers that question.

Observe the ad below. Notice the welcoming posture almost as if shes saying “come get me.” Notice the suggestive look in her eyes. Not to mention the obvious, her bra and underwear are showing.

The nerve of this ad [Refer to the ad above]! There is no need breaking down this ad, clearly the two are in or about to be in, the process of sexual intercourse.

Now you may not know, but Candies is a brand originally formed in an effort to prevent teen pregnancy and empower young girls. These ads displayed and continue to display everything but. Majority of Candies ads I have seen are promoting sex and the concept that “hey young ladies, this is what you should aspire to be. . . oh and more importantly in order to obtain this look, come purchase this product.”

We’ve all seen the countless of ads featuring God-like figures a.k.a “the muscled men in underwear of the Calvin Klein ads” that are trying to sell jeans (Bordo, 221). Although by the ad itself, it is understandable how it can mistaken that the purpose of the ad is to be displaying the latest sex move. Essentially, companies lose the essence of their product when they don’t even take into consideration that sure contributing sex is sometime efficient in advertising, but when and where is it appropriate?