2.9% alcohol. 100% sexist.
This ad for Coopers Premium Light beer, created by a Singapore agency, is one of three. Get it? Because of the low alcohol content dudes won't have beer goggles and end up hooking with an "ugly" woman! Charming, no?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: 2.9% alcohol. 100% sexist..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15993
What?
Lame-ass beer ads are a dime a dozen. Ha ha, beer goggles... ha ha, fat chicks... ha ha, tits and tail... ha ha, massive superiority complex. Nothing new to see here. Alcohol marketing is, by and large, a one trick pony.
Now whenever I see ads like these, I can't help but wonder about the women in them. How do they end up in these ads? I mean, are there open casting calls for so-called "ugly" models? Do agents go up to these women on the street? How much do these ladies know about the message of the ad before letting themselves be photographed?
Neither my heart nor my brain can bear the thought of a person willingly walking into a scenario like this and essentially saying "yes, cast me as ugly and make my body a point of mockery in your ads!" The personal aspect of these ads takes the travesty of it all to a whole new level.
Ugh. WTF is wrong with people at ad agencies for coming up with this stuff?
The orginal article states, "Also, as copyranter points out, the woman in the middle picture may be underage, and the woman in the third photo has on a ring and so is presumably engaged or married. So I guess it’s not just about them being unattractive, but I think that’s obviously a major element of the ads."
Um, it's probably the main element. Because if they were really focused on the relationship status and age of the women, we'd probably still see buxom size 2 blondes in the ads.
ugh, seriously??
Huh. I thought the whole purpose of drinking beer was to consume alcohol. Sure, there are some tasty beers out there. I'm going to hazard a guess that this isn't one of them, though.
There's not enough alcohol content to make me forget how awful this ad is.
No joke. Because if you don't want the booze, there are much cheaper drinks that will do less damage to your body (and belly).
Oh hell no!!!
Personally, I avoid buying weak beer. Which is tough actually because I live in Oklahoma and the only kind of alcohol you can buy in grocery stores IS weak beer. Lame.
Anywho, did anybody else see this Broadsheet article about more stupid beer ads?
Wouldn't it make more sense if they were advertising it to women as a way thwart horrible men who think drunk girl=invitation to rape?
And, yes, I'm aware of all the problems with that line of argument.
Why are they so mean?
I feel like this comment asks the most pertinent question of all.
The thing to remember here is that men of this ilk will never get that they're mean - because that would presume they've ever considered "fat, old or ugly" women to matter in the slightest. Such women don't matter at all to men like this. To say to such a man "why are you being mean to that woman?" in regard to any woman the man doesn't want to f*ck is, to him, the same as saying "Why are you being mean to that rock?" They simply do not get it. The only time men like that are "nice" to women is when they want something from them.
... what self-respecting drinker would waste their time with booze that's only 2.9% alcohol anyway?
It was pretty common for beers to be low percentage in history. Alcohol percentages have climbed a lot in the past few years.
I'd drink a low percentage beer if it tasted good. Getting wasted isn't the only pupose for beer.
The only reason in the world for the existence of low alcohol beers like these is so you can have a few and still drive. Australia has much tougher BAC laws than the US. That said, this campaign is just plain confusing, not to mention gross. Before I saw the other ads, my initial reaction was that they were pitching this like the new "low carb" beers in the US, which want you to think you can get loaded and still loose weight. I thought they were going for something like: "Are you the lonely fat chick at the party? Try this beer and be hawt!" Not sure which is worse...
She's not even unattractive! She's plus-sized, but I suppose that transfers into "ugly fat cow" in man-land.
She's plus-sized? That's so funny, I never know when a model is plus-sized unless someone tells me. There was an article recently about a model who wrote a book about her struggle with an eating disorder and is now a plus model, and I'm looking at the before and after pictures thinking, "That's what they call plus-size now? Shit, that's ME!" Sorry if this is a derail...
I agree, she is not unattractive. I do however believe that all these photos have been photoshopped, specifically the first one.
Is it just me, or are they photoshopping body parts here?
Picture #1 --The woman's calves are sleeker, shinier, "sexier" than the rest of her skin
Picture #2 --The woman's breasts are full, defined, and freckle-free, and again the skin does not match the rest of her body
Picture ## --The woman's skin looks more airbrushed than her arms, and her head seems a bit out of proportion with the rest of her body
So I guess the woman who are being objectified in the ad as sexually available bodies are being further objectified again in the context of the ad as sexualized body parts. Unbelievable.
Its also weird to think about what was going on in the minds of the immature people who designed these. Like for picture #3--"all the potential 'sexiness' in that woman's perfectly constructed face is negated by her chubby arms". wtf?!
As per the update on the original article, I think the intention was that ~2.9% of the women in the ad have been "changed" by the beer goggle effect:
...So I think they are supposed to be unattractive, except for the small beer goggled area: the calf on the first model, the breasts on the second, and the face on the third.
I've seen these ads before, and I did not pick up on that. I think you are right.
I get it now, but I didn't until I saw that explanation. I don't think they're very effective ads-- you have to think about it to figure out why the picture looks so strange, and then when you do figure it out, its offensive.
I didn't even think of that at first, but I did notice the boobs in the second picture and the head seeming out of place in the third. Now that I look at the first one again, it's apparent that only one calf is toned and obviously photoshopped.
Considering that this wasn't obvious from the beginning makes these adds a total fail.
damn i love it when advertisements remind me that my freckle-covered skin is, in fact, hideous. i always forget that i'm supposed to be ugly! all apologies to any who are offended by my gross display of non-porcelain and non-tanned skin.
also, it seems as if there is a correlation between sexist ads and shitty-tasting beers...
Oh man, I love freckles! I think they are incredibly cute and sexy on any gender... and I know a lot of people agree with me!!
Not saying freckled folks don't face some discrimination and "othering" and whatnot... but anybody who doesn't think they're super is just missing out!!
oh, i agree! and i do think a lot of people think that way as well, or don't care one way or the other. it's just seemed funny to me to see the "freckles are ugly" thing on a new advertisement, it just seems so 1950s women's magazine, you know, like "How do I get rid these horrible freckles?" or "Use this face cream to get rid of those icky beauty marks!" or something like that.
...she's ugly?
Just as an explanation:
I think the idea is that she is only "half-pretty" because the beer-goggles are so "weak" that they don't convert all of her "hideousness" into beauty.
It's not a big deal if they also have ads targeted at women, warning them to stay away ugly, un-attractive men when they're drunk.
It'd be fine if it was both ways, but it's not.
Otherwise, this is just unfair, sexist and misogynistic.
i disagree. it's not fine to say that hooking up with an "ugly" or "unattractive person" is a bad thing.
the word ugly as it relates to human appearance should go away. no one chooses their features, no one wants to be considered unattractive. appearance-based judgements really fucking irk me.
no one has to stay away from unattractive men or women when they're drunk!
Wait... what? You're telling me not to find attractive people attractive? You're telling me not to find ugly people ugly?
So, essentially you're telling me to be blind. Or maybe, to change the way I feel? Hell, if we can do that I think gay people should change the way they feel so that they like people of the opposite sex!
I'm sorry, but this notion is ridiculous. I find pretty girls PRETTY. Isn't it strange? I judge people on their appearances, and I'm sure you do too. You just stick your fingers in your ears and go, "lalala I can't hear you". But It's still there.
That's ridiculous. First, making nasty judgments on people based on their appearance is a pretty douchey thing to do, just in general. Second, attractiveness is subjective. What the hell is a "pretty girl" and why do you get to define that for the entire world?