Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2016
- Posts
- 1,412
- Location
- Moonbase Alpha
The scanty women are a key part of OC's sales strategy and success?
This guy claims ocuk are putting porn on the monitor screens for advertising!!!
- Thread starter west1980
- Start date
- Status
The scanty women are a key part of OC's sales strategy and success?
hi i by monirors with hot chix k
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 9,968
- Location
- Poland
I am offended!!!!
.....by his caterpillar.
.....by his caterpillar.
That's not his argument though, plenty of adverts make zero sense and use scantily clad women.
Tbh I have no idea how that or normal adverts work, but they must do on a large number of people.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Jul 2016
- Posts
- 2,225
I wonder which staff member chooses the pictures, one monitor shows a Mustang so Gibbo must be partially involved
there is a specific person just to look through all the pics to pick the best ones for selling the monitors.
This argument has been rehashed a few times before....
If the pictures on monitors are pornography then the beach I visited, in the nice weather today, must have been contender for the world's largest orgy given the amount of people in skimpy swimwear.
Needless to say I don't think the monitor pictures are pornography in the generally accepted contemporary use of the word.
We then just get into the to the 'objectification' issue....
Which never really made a whole lot of sense to me.... Both men and women are, to varying degrees, 'objectified' when it comes to maters of sex, relationships etc. Essentially 'objectification' could be said to be focusing on a rather narrow range of factors that makes all humans differnt (such as looks, personality, wealth etc)
Differing societal norms can of course have an effect but ultimately I suggest that sexual selection (biological differences in the sexes driven by more successful strategies for reproduction) is a key driver in the differing degrees and ways in which men and women tend to be viewed in a sexual /relationship sense
Of course men can and are objectified for their looks in advertising (diet coke adverts etc) but generally what is 'attractive' in a man and a woman (in a heterosexual sense) is rather different.
This should not really come as a huge shock as we frequently see sexual selection in play in both the physical appearance of other animals (peacocks) and their behaviours.
Men tend to be more rated on their wealth and status where as women tend to be more rated on their looks.
In my view it is no less shallow to have an attractive woman in a bikini in one advert then it is to have an expensively groomed man in another in a nice suite advertising something unrelated to either the suit or the grooming.
In both cases the advertiser's are perhaps seeking to tap into the innate sexual preferences generally displayed by men and women to sell a product based on what is really a rather a shallow take on the people used in the adverts.
The whole thing about men 'objeectfying' women (more then the reverse) is, in my view, ridiculous......
Heterosexual men are, in a general sense, inherently more concerned with the physical appearance of members of the opposite sex......
Much like the reverse is true for peacocks (who carry a somewhat ridiculous, predator attracting, display of feather on their backs to attract females. With female pea hens being very plain in comparison.
If the pictures on monitors are pornography then the beach I visited, in the nice weather today, must have been contender for the world's largest orgy given the amount of people in skimpy swimwear.
Needless to say I don't think the monitor pictures are pornography in the generally accepted contemporary use of the word.
We then just get into the to the 'objectification' issue....
Which never really made a whole lot of sense to me.... Both men and women are, to varying degrees, 'objectified' when it comes to maters of sex, relationships etc. Essentially 'objectification' could be said to be focusing on a rather narrow range of factors that makes all humans differnt (such as looks, personality, wealth etc)
Differing societal norms can of course have an effect but ultimately I suggest that sexual selection (biological differences in the sexes driven by more successful strategies for reproduction) is a key driver in the differing degrees and ways in which men and women tend to be viewed in a sexual /relationship sense
Of course men can and are objectified for their looks in advertising (diet coke adverts etc) but generally what is 'attractive' in a man and a woman (in a heterosexual sense) is rather different.
This should not really come as a huge shock as we frequently see sexual selection in play in both the physical appearance of other animals (peacocks) and their behaviours.
Men tend to be more rated on their wealth and status where as women tend to be more rated on their looks.
In my view it is no less shallow to have an attractive woman in a bikini in one advert then it is to have an expensively groomed man in another in a nice suite advertising something unrelated to either the suit or the grooming.
In both cases the advertiser's are perhaps seeking to tap into the innate sexual preferences generally displayed by men and women to sell a product based on what is really a rather a shallow take on the people used in the adverts.
The whole thing about men 'objeectfying' women (more then the reverse) is, in my view, ridiculous......
Heterosexual men are, in a general sense, inherently more concerned with the physical appearance of members of the opposite sex......
Much like the reverse is true for peacocks (who carry a somewhat ridiculous, predator attracting, display of feather on their backs to attract females. With female pea hens being very plain in comparison.
got a TL-DR for that?
correct on all 3 points, its Saturday night, ive drunk beer, and now im off to bed = end,
night night
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,499
- Location
- ST4
A formula that doesn't require semi naked women to sell their monitors?
All jesting aside. You genuinely think OcUK's success is down to the use of these images on monitors?
That's my position too.
I've no doubt the person is (a) lying and (b) over-reacting, but there is a point that could be made. The pictures are pointless and tasteless and I'd argue that's bad for business to some extent. Probably not much because most potential customers would know that the image displayed on a picture of a monitor in an advert is irrelevant, but it's, well, naff.
- Status