But soft-porn is just a label thrown around at stuff that isn't porn. If you ask me, the Britney Spears video is a lot more closer to porn than this. You could throw the term soft-porn at works of art like David. It's like "public mischief" - if you can't charge the person with anything else that's illegal, you can charge them with the highly subjective "public mischief" charge.
As for the NC-17 thing, I think movie censors are lame also. But keep in mind that NC-17 movies are completely restricted to people under 17. Similarly, the A&F catalog is only for sale to those 18 and over.
I don't see the problem here.
If they keep it restricted to 18+, then I don't have a problem. But if people argue that it should be available to minors, then I do have a problem with that.
Viper GTS
I don't see the problem here.
If they keep it restricted to 18+, then I don't have a problem. But if people argue that it should be available to minors, then I do have a problem with that.
Viper GTS
Look here... here's what y'all are getting all riled up about--boobs and behinds (R-rated material).
There is NO full-frontal nudity in the catalog. Boobs and behinds. Big deal.
The awful truth
l2c
P.S. Your definition notwithstanding, I still say this stuff isn't porn.
There is NO full-frontal nudity in the catalog. Boobs and behinds. Big deal.
The awful truth
l2c
P.S. Your definition notwithstanding, I still say this stuff isn't porn.
kami
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 17,627
- 5
- 81
Do these people know what soft porn is? Soft porn can be FULL nudity...there's just no...activities...going on. Is that not correct?
edit: just read l2c's link. appears to be some topless shots and asses. That's nothing you can't see on any late night TV. Plus it's aimed at college students. What's the big deal?
BTW, I find A&F to be one of the most pathetically overrated clothing stores in existance. When I was down in NY, I went into a store and pretty much left laughing. I couldn't believe what they were charging for some of that crap. Nothing but trendy POS clothing...
edit: just read l2c's link. appears to be some topless shots and asses. That's nothing you can't see on any late night TV. Plus it's aimed at college students. What's the big deal?
BTW, I find A&F to be one of the most pathetically overrated clothing stores in existance. When I was down in NY, I went into a store and pretty much left laughing. I couldn't believe what they were charging for some of that crap. Nothing but trendy POS clothing...
isildur
Golden Member
- Jan 3, 2001
- 1,509
- 0
- 76
The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that it is the issue of prurience that is critical. I could show you a woman eating a banana and make it prurient, or I could show you a shower full of naked women (Schindler's List anyone?) and have it be anything but.
I agree with your point about BS, but I think your example of the David is flawed for a couple of reasons - it's a classical sculpture, so direct comparisen is somewhat iffy and second, the David isn't shown in it's full "glory" in public broadcasting or publication. Why? Because, besides the determination of prurience, we have also put social limitations on the display of nudity. In our country, nudity cannot be disseminated in such a way that it may be available to minors - artistic or otherwise. Simply put, it really makes no difference whether or not the imagery in the AF catalogue is pr0n or prurient, as it depicts nudity and because the company is allowing it to be distributed to minors.
I agree with your point about BS, but I think your example of the David is flawed for a couple of reasons - it's a classical sculpture, so direct comparisen is somewhat iffy and second, the David isn't shown in it's full "glory" in public broadcasting or publication. Why? Because, besides the determination of prurience, we have also put social limitations on the display of nudity. In our country, nudity cannot be disseminated in such a way that it may be available to minors - artistic or otherwise. Simply put, it really makes no difference whether or not the imagery in the AF catalogue is pr0n or prurient, as it depicts nudity and because the company is allowing it to be distributed to minors.
SI's swimsuit issue is soft porn. Beauty pagents are soft pornos. A picture of your kids swimming class is a soft porno. When you get into wishy washy terms like soft-porn, they can apply to everything. A lot of Muslim countries think that unless women are covered from head to toe, they're being sexually explicit. Which is why I reserve the term for clear sexual acts. Because if it just involves nudity or the hint of nudity or arousal, that can mean almost anything.
Capn
Don't think for a second that if there were even a HINT of a vagina being shown, the ADA wouldn't be VERY specific about pointing it out. What they meant by "Full Frontal" was an unobscured view of a topless female (i.e. no shirt, no cleverly placed props to obscure/partially obscure the breasts).
I'm tempted to go down there and buy one of these things and scan in the photos to prove it to y'all, but I just realized that I don't care enough to do that
l2c
i.e. I love how they try to associate the catalog with Playboy and Playgirl. Give me a break!!!
Don't think for a second that if there were even a HINT of a vagina being shown, the ADA wouldn't be VERY specific about pointing it out. What they meant by "Full Frontal" was an unobscured view of a topless female (i.e. no shirt, no cleverly placed props to obscure/partially obscure the breasts).
I'm tempted to go down there and buy one of these things and scan in the photos to prove it to y'all, but I just realized that I don't care enough to do that
l2c
i.e. I love how they try to associate the catalog with Playboy and Playgirl. Give me a break!!!
Well, in certain parts of North America, women can go topless in public <cough> Toronto It's all a matter of perspective I suppose. What's porn to you may not be porn to me.
It's all a matter of perspective I suppose. What's porn to you may not be porn to me.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,837
- 2,621
- 136
The fact of the matter is, up until a few years ago A & F was a dying chaing that sold primarily to grandmas. They mounted this whole youth/nudity campaign to specifically turn the company around, and it worked enormously well. Sex and controversy sells goods, pure and simple. You think their opponents would wise up and quit their b*tching, as they playing directly into A&F's hands (& fattening their coffers).
A pox on all their houses.
A pox on all their houses.
isildur
Golden Member
- Jan 3, 2001
- 1,509
- 0
- 76
SI's swimsuit issue is soft porn. Yep.
Beauty pagents are soft pornos. Sure.
A picture of your kids swimming class is a soft porno. Ummm, not so sure...
When you get into wishy washy terms like soft-porn, they can apply to everything. A lot of Muslim countries think that unless women are covered from head to toe, they're being sexually explicit. Which is why I reserve the term for clear sexual acts. Because if it just involves nudity or the hint of nudity or arousal, that can mean almost anything
I have no problem with your objection, except that you seem to think your definition is the one we should all work with, rather than the accepted, legal ones I presented. That is fighting a losing battle. I may think that "violence" should only be applied when someone's life is in jeopardy and, no matter how vehemently I may argue my point to the cops when they show up to arrest me because I smacked my wife or g/f around (come on! that's not really violent!) or when the counselor tells me that the years of verbal abuse I subjected my children to amounts to violence (hey, I just told him he was a worthless sh!t to make him tougher, that's not violence!), I will likely get nowhere indeed.
Thump - your assesment isn't entirely accuate. AF only recently introduced the nekkid ads, so they are incidental to their recovery sales-wise. Also, their sales aren't growing like they had been now either. In the marketing department where I work, their nekkid campaign is generally seen as a bad attempt at being controversial and <maybe> a desperate grasp at reinvigorating their growth.
Beauty pagents are soft pornos. Sure.
A picture of your kids swimming class is a soft porno. Ummm, not so sure...
When you get into wishy washy terms like soft-porn, they can apply to everything. A lot of Muslim countries think that unless women are covered from head to toe, they're being sexually explicit. Which is why I reserve the term for clear sexual acts. Because if it just involves nudity or the hint of nudity or arousal, that can mean almost anything
I have no problem with your objection, except that you seem to think your definition is the one we should all work with, rather than the accepted, legal ones I presented. That is fighting a losing battle. I may think that "violence" should only be applied when someone's life is in jeopardy and, no matter how vehemently I may argue my point to the cops when they show up to arrest me because I smacked my wife or g/f around (come on! that's not really violent!) or when the counselor tells me that the years of verbal abuse I subjected my children to amounts to violence (hey, I just told him he was a worthless sh!t to make him tougher, that's not violence!), I will likely get nowhere indeed.
Thump - your assesment isn't entirely accuate. AF only recently introduced the nekkid ads, so they are incidental to their recovery sales-wise. Also, their sales aren't growing like they had been now either. In the marketing department where I work, their nekkid campaign is generally seen as a bad attempt at being controversial and <maybe> a desperate grasp at reinvigorating their growth.
The examples you gave isildur are clearly covered in the law. But when it comes to pornography, it is subjective. David is okay because it's a classic. But if CompanyX does nudity, it's not okay. What you have is material that is only illegal when viewed by somebody who disagrees with its appropriateness. You can show nudity on cable, but not on a store shelf to adults without being boycotted? C'mon.
<- wish I wasn't behind a crapped out proxy == limited post lenghs!
I'm not saying I'm right about this, more as I'm trying to point out the inconsistencies in the standards. Imagine if you had a government-sanctioned boycott of your business because you were doing the same thing other people were legally doing?
I'm not saying I'm right about this, more as I'm trying to point out the inconsistencies in the standards. Imagine if you had a government-sanctioned boycott of your business because you were doing the same thing other people were legally doing?
someone at my high school was/is a model for A&F. He was also on some show on comedy central... gosh, can't remember the name of it.
The man show?
So is the A&F catalog gonna be the new victorias secret to horny pre-teens everywhere?
So is the A&F catalog gonna be the new victorias secret to horny pre-teens everywhere?
Freejack2
Diamond Member
- Dec 31, 2000
- 7,751
- 8
- 91
*sigh* These same organizations that join forces to ban a catalog, more often than not, find it perfectly fine to allow kids to watch violence on tv. So the message they are saying is it's ok to commit acts of violence but god forbid you should have sex! Kids these days seem to know all about guns and violence, but a condom, pregnancy, or aids, they know nothing about. I'm sorry but there is something fundamentally wrong with this.
I love AF. I think it's preppy and casual classy. But I like that style of clothing. What else am i suppose to wear? rugged? ghetto?
heh.. its not gay or lesbian.. where do people come up with this?
anyhow. silly people.
heh.. its not gay or lesbian.. where do people come up with this?
anyhow. silly people.
After viewing the various links and looking at what everyone is stating there seems to be several points to consider here.
1. The morals of the masses are being defined either by outdated standards or by small groups who believe that thier beliefs are what EVERYONE should have.
2. The issue is one that is and can only be an issue here is the US. Most other countries in the world have a clear delinitation of what is acceptable, while we can't for the simple reason we are confused. (We want to be a leader in the world in all respects but at the same time we refuse to accept the mores or other nations as being valid.)
3. Whether A&F was right in publishing this ultimatelly will be decided in the most "American" way, in the market place. If it bombs, they will have to move onto another marketing strategy, if it succeeds then they will continue down this path.
4. There has not yet been anyone touching upon the circulation. Consider this they are circulating 300K catalogs, the most read magizines in general will get seven views per magazine circulated, at 300K the most number of people who WOULD have seen this had there been no boycot would have been 2.1M. That really is not a great number in the overall scope of the population. The objective of marketing is to reach as many people in the right demographic for the lowest cost. This boycot is going to achieve that goal for them.
5. The morals that generally prevail for the middle of the road Americans, are not the morals that are pushed by the extremeist groups of either side of the issue.
just my $.02
1. The morals of the masses are being defined either by outdated standards or by small groups who believe that thier beliefs are what EVERYONE should have.
2. The issue is one that is and can only be an issue here is the US. Most other countries in the world have a clear delinitation of what is acceptable, while we can't for the simple reason we are confused. (We want to be a leader in the world in all respects but at the same time we refuse to accept the mores or other nations as being valid.)
3. Whether A&F was right in publishing this ultimatelly will be decided in the most "American" way, in the market place. If it bombs, they will have to move onto another marketing strategy, if it succeeds then they will continue down this path.
4. There has not yet been anyone touching upon the circulation. Consider this they are circulating 300K catalogs, the most read magizines in general will get seven views per magazine circulated, at 300K the most number of people who WOULD have seen this had there been no boycot would have been 2.1M. That really is not a great number in the overall scope of the population. The objective of marketing is to reach as many people in the right demographic for the lowest cost. This boycot is going to achieve that goal for them.
5. The morals that generally prevail for the middle of the road Americans, are not the morals that are pushed by the extremeist groups of either side of the issue.
just my $.02
I disagree that the boycott's going to dent their numbers. Out of the people that this boycott is being fashioned, how many of them would've shopped at A&F in the first place? If they were offended, they would've been offended already. So why join a boycott if you're not offended. Also, by having the boycott, it's going to bring attention to A&F. I, for one, had not the first inkling of A&F 'til this thread. Now I'm partially siding with them just because I think that teenagers have a little more sense than this boycott lady gives them credit for (and like a friend in another forum pointed out, isn't it wrong for her to be using our tax dollars for her crusade?). How many of you feel that it would've adversely affected you by viewing naked people? I think if people are brought up correctly, then it's not going to be that big of a deal. We should respect our bodies and not be ashamed of them. I'm not saying that we should throw our clothes away, but hey- what's wrong w/ some artsy nudity? Europe didn't implode due to it in their print publications. And hey- maybe I'm biased. I once cut out a B&W Obsession ad, took it to a poster shop, had a backing board put on it and mounted it on my wall. Naked guy and gal together on a swing. I thought it was great. Still do
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter