[QUOTE=JustTheTicket;8206292]
Wearing a bikini on tv is a heinous act?[/QUOTE]
No. Hyperbole.
Tho one could say that using sex to sell products to men does at times skate close to the definition. But hey, they’d insist they are big boys – who DON’T objectify their wives, mothers, and daughters … (just most every other female)
You really do need to calm down about it.
[QUOTE=Sticky Situation;8206365]
So, is this advertisement exploitation of women?[/QUOTE]
No because most of them are chunky, and don’t have gorgeous bodies. So that is ok, apparently. They get points for being “Refreshing”, and everyone thinks it’s great. Only really pretty women with gorgeous bodies in bikinis aren’t acceptable according to some here.
[QUOTE=aregard;8206309]
No. Hyperbole.
Tho one could say that using sex to sell products to men does at times skate close to the definition. But hey, they’d insist they are big boys – who DON’T objectify their wives, mothers, and daughters … (just most every other female)[/QUOTE]
Now you’re definitely over the line! Don’t presume to know what I think or how I behave!
[QUOTE=Bombproof;8206372]
Now you’re definitely over the line! Don’t presume to know what I think or how I behave![/QUOTE]
Ever notice the Humpty Dumpty Logic in a lot of comments?
“‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’”
G.
Equal opportunity bashing, “Hannah and her horse behind the scenes”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G8jJGa4NQtQ
That was in my original post. They portray men as sexist, with the appropriate stupid male bonding scene, and awful come on lines.
The Spanish language “shoe? What’s a shoe” is what originally cracked me up along with “do you have a sister?”
from a pure business aspect the Hannah commercials would be rated a huge success. In this age and time nearly anything that can grasp the minds of the public is difficult to obtain, so the longer you rant about it the longer it will remain
As for Hannah doing the commercials for the money… Jeter-Davis setup-- Jeter is estimated to be worth $200 million
the commercials have done what they were intended, capture the conversation of the public, good or bad as long as the people are talking there is commercial life
As for money:
Davis, 24, netted a “strong six-figure deal,” according to an industry source, for two ads that feature the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit cover girl with a horse on a Caribbean beach.
http://pagesix.com/2015/04/11/hannah-davis-lands-big-payday-as-directv-yanks-rob-lowe-ads/
Did she need it? Most likely no, at least as long as she has a relationship with Jeter who is estimated being worth more than $200M
http://bustedcoverage.com/2015/05/05/jeter-allowed-girlfriend-hannah-davis-to-work-grubby-kentucky-derby-watch-party/
Will she parley this role into the next level of super model, most likely yes
[QUOTE=clanter;8206541]
the commercials have done what they were intended, capture the conversation of the public, good or bad as long as the people are talking there is commercial life
As for money:
http://pagesix.com/2015/04/11/hannah-davis-lands-big-payday-as-directv-yanks-rob-lowe-ads/
Did she need it? Most likely no, at least as long as she has a relationship with Jeter who is estimated being worth more than $200M
http://bustedcoverage.com/2015/05/05/jeter-allowed-girlfriend-hannah-davis-to-work-grubby-kentucky-derby-watch-party/
Will she parley this role into the next level of super model, most likely yes[/QUOTE]
Oh clanter, I usually like what you post, but puhleeze get that “does she need it” comment out - it kind of comes across as indicating women, no matter what their achievements or success, should aspire to hook a rich man…
The achievement I’m most proud of is independence. Come hell or high water, I can take care of myself and do not need a man for money or advice.
[QUOTE=JustTheTicket;8206311]
You really do need to calm down about it.[/QUOTE]
Why?
[QUOTE=Bombproof;8206372]
Now you’re definitely over the line! Don’t presume to know what I think or how I behave![/QUOTE]
Didn’t even know you were male.
I apologize for saying you would insist you are a big boy. 
(No, really, if you were offended by my remark, I apologize.)
[QUOTE=aregard;8206616]
Why?[/QUOTE]
Why? Really? Because who puts this much effort into being offended on someone else’s behalf? Someone who doesn’t even need it. She’s fine. She’s rolling in the dollar bills and handsome boyfriend and she’s very much allowed to walk away from it all if she so desires. I think the commercials are stupid, but it has nothing to do with her. They just annoy me. And that’s all the thought that really needs to go into it. So yeah, calm your tits.
[QUOTE=Flash44;8206570]
it kind of comes across as indicating women, no matter what their achievements or success, should aspire to hook a rich man…
The achievement I’m most proud of is independence. Come hell or high water, I can take care of myself and do not need a man for money or advice.[/QUOTE]
She is smart… she appears to know what she is doing and how she will accomplish whatever goal she has envisioned
her profile, and her paycheck, has risen significantly thanks to her provocative SI cover and discreet but stable relationship with the retired Yankee superstar.
My son works with any of the world’s top models, none are idiotic. The industry is harsh and unforgiving… those that are difficult usually are by passed as there are many whose goals are to retire early
[QUOTE=Sticky Situation;8206365]
So, is this advertisement exploitation of women?[/QUOTE]
Well, according to what some have said here (tho’ they may not realize they were saying it), this ad could be considered exploitation of men! 
As in, trying to get them to put their money where their “brain” is.
And since this thread has gone WAY beyond the bounds of being horse-related, maybe it’s time the mods locked it?
[QUOTE=JustTheTicket;8206624]
Why? Really? Because who puts this much effort into being offended on someone else’s behalf? Someone who doesn’t even need it. She’s fine. She’s rolling in the dollar bills and handsome boyfriend and she’s very much allowed to walk away from it all if she so desires. I think the commercials are stupid, but it has nothing to do with her. They just annoy me. And that’s all the thought that really needs to go into it. So yeah, calm your tits.[/QUOTE]
Wow. Way to assume. Again.
And you’ve still got the wrong end of the stick. I don’t care what the model does, and I don’t know what the commercials are even for (so much for Clanter’s claim that they are successful.)
I was responding to your suggestion (that you have said was sarcasm anyway) that we ‘support our sister’ in ‘wearing what she likes’, when it is clear that a produced advertisement has zip to do with sisterhood and/or ‘what she likes’ to wear, but is instead a careful manipulation of elements designed to produce buying behaviors.
If your post was sarcasm, as you indicated, then we are in agreement in large part, and yet you figure I’m somehow twitching in bed at night from some kind of indignation about a pretty girl with lotsa money.
The part that has me the most gobsmacked right now is that people can’t seem to separate the two aspects of this discussion, even after several posts to clarify.
I must be an extraordinarily bad communicator.
[QUOTE=jetsmom;8206371]
No because most of them are chunky, and don’t have gorgeous bodies. So that is ok, apparently. They get points for being “Refreshing”, and everyone thinks it’s great. Only really pretty women with gorgeous bodies in bikinis aren’t acceptable according to some here.[/QUOTE]
I disagree. Gonna get myself in trouble again by even going there, but…
The Dove ad is focused on getting women to purchase a product that will “make their skin beautiful” even if they don’t have perfect skin. It is not exploiting women-as-objects for men, but it is exploiting womens fear of imperfection, in an ad designed to get women to make a purchase.
That it doesn’t use ‘perfect’ models is ‘refreshing’ insofar as that represents a departure from the norm in advertising. (Certainly it’s not a departure from the norm in life.)
[QUOTE=Flash44;8206570]
Oh clanter, I usually like what you post, but puhleeze get that “does she need it” comment out - it kind of comes across as indicating women, no matter what their achievements or success, should aspire to hook a rich man…
The achievement I’m most proud of is independence. Come hell or high water, I can take care of myself and do not need a man for money or advice.[/QUOTE]
Independence is a fine goal.
People whose body is their stock in trade (models and athletes particularly) have limited “shelf lives.” If they make it in those professions they have to make what they can as they can and be wise in how they spend it. If not they end up like large numbers of NFL players, in bankruptcy within a couple of years of their retirement.
Some do quite well afterwards, in fact, but folks like Peyton Manning, Heidi Klum, Shaq, Cindy Crawford, etc. are the exceptions to the general rule.
Many of us don’t “need” the advice or input of the opposite sex on some issues but that doesn’t mean that such input is not often enormously helpful. Stepping outside your normal “comfort zone” and looking back on yourself can be a painful experience but one that must from time to time be lived. Or you end up with a highly self centered, closed minded view of the Universe.
G.
[QUOTE=aregard;8206634]
Wow. Way to assume. Again.
And you’ve still got the wrong end of the stick. I don’t care what the model does, and I don’t know what the commercials are even for (so much for Clanter’s claim that they are successful.)
I was responding to your suggestion (that you have said was sarcasm anyway) that we ‘support our sister’ in ‘wearing what she likes’, when it is clear that a produced advertisement has zip to do with sisterhood and/or ‘what she likes’ to wear, but is instead a careful manipulation of elements designed to produce buying behaviors.
If your post was sarcasm, as you indicated, then we are in agreement in large part, and yet you figure I’m somehow twitching in bed at night from some kind of indignation about a pretty girl with lotsa money.
The part that has me the most gobsmacked right now is that people can’t seem to separate the two aspects of this discussion, even after several posts to clarify.
I must be an extraordinarily bad communicator.[/QUOTE]
I’m not assuming anything. Everything I say is in response to what you’ve said. I’m not reading that much into it. But whatever. Get over it. Still. Wow. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Guilherme;8206664]
Independence is a fine goal.
People whose body is their stock in trade (models and athletes particularly) have limited “shelf lives.” If they make it in those professions they have to make what they can as they can and be wise in how they spend it. If not they end up like large numbers of NFL players, in bankruptcy within a couple of years of their retirement.
Some do quite well afterwards, in fact, but folks like Peyton Manning, Heidi Klum, Shaq, Cindy Crawford, etc. are the exceptions to the general rule.
Many of us don’t “need” the advice or input of the opposite sex on some issues but that doesn’t mean that such input is not often enormously helpful. Stepping outside your normal “comfort zone” and looking back on yourself can be a painful experience but one that must from time to time be lived. Or you end up with a highly self centered, closed minded view of the Universe.
G.[/QUOTE]
And that is exactly the view that most of us have.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
