f13.net

http://owni.eu/2010/11/08/top-48-ads-that-would-never-be-allowed-today/

Magazine ads from the 50s!

(http://i.imgur.com/H2qzs.jpg)

 :rimshot:

Those adverts were awesome, especially from a historical perspective.  It's amazing what kinds of things were acceptable to say not all that long ago.  The Van Heusen ones were just so out there with the misogyny though.

Even trying to put on what I think the mindset was back when these were published, I just can't fathom how anyone would think advertising like this was acceptable and okay.

Um, why wouldn't they ?

Men controlled the money, so you advertised to them.  White men, so making fun of darkies was also ok.  As for Cigarettes, well, the public were fuck stupid back then, so fuck them.

Marketing is the same today.  The exact same.  It doesn't give a fuck what the message is;  it just aims it at whoever has the money.

Haha, the "drink beer breast feeding" one is good.

Pretty sure Guiness ran a lot of those ads as well not too far back. Funny stuff.

The VD one doesn't strike me as particularly sexist. Hell, you see similar things these days.  Or is that ok and not sexist because it's men being shown with the stds instead of prostitutes?    :oh_i_see:

The last few are fucking terrifying, The Pears Soap one? Christ.

Yeah what the hell was the Pears soap one about?

Some of them aren't really that big of a deal. Yes, at one point it was considered normal for the man to hold down a job and the woman to maintain the household. Yes, at one point the negative effects of smoking were poorly understood. The pig cutting itself into lunchmeat was awesome, and the kid with the M-16? They put an orange thing on the front now so Junior doesn't get gunned down by the cops, but otherwise what's changed there?

Others are fucking jaw-dropping. What the hell is that "Is it always illegal to kill a woman?" thing even about?

The orange circle on the gun always amuses me.  I've had a federal agent tell me he'd just paint an orange circle on a real gun were he going to be naughty.

The kill a woman one made me boggle too, so I did a little looking - there's supposed to be a story with that ad.

http://picchore.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/is-it-always-illegal-to-kill-a-woman.jpg

Women around here still get confused by our Pitney-Bowes machine.

It's not PC to illuminate the shortcomings of the feminine gender, but the general weaknesses are still there.  Same for males, of course.  Which is why I don't let my wife navigate on trips.

Some of the most hilariously misogynistic ones look like they date from the late sixties or early seventies. A number of the older ones are more or less innocent except that, wow, they show a woman scrubbing the floor or whatever. To which I can only ask, when was the last time you saw a man pushing the Swiffer around in a commercial for one here in the 21st century? Right.

But some the later ones have this really strong whiff of anti-feminism surrounding them. It's feels less like "We're selling a fruit-bottling machine in 1952, who the hell is it supposed to be for? Men?" and a lot more like "Fuck bro, these bitches are all wanting to be your equal and shit! Well show them who's the man with these sexy new pants!"

Namely the tigerskin rug ad, and the one with the naked bitch looking worshipfully at a shoe.

The one with the woman hanging off the side of the cliff made me chuckle, at least.

It's not PC to illuminate the shortcomings of <Ethnic Minority>, but the general weaknesses are still there.  Same for <Our Ethnic Group>, of course.  Which is why I don't let my <Ethnic Neighbor> navigate on trips.

What ethnic group is bad navigating trips?  Don't think I've ever heard that stereotype before.

Cubans.

No stereotype is ever true in any way. All groups of human beings are precisely identical in every way. Asians and black guys are the same average height. Jews and Mexicans are equally represented in the fields of law and comedy. Women are no more likely to shriek at the sight of a big disgusting bug than men.

Yes, but there is always one person who fits the stereotype. This person is generally anecdotal, and quite possibly real/an urban legend. Those who want to justify stereotyping will point to this person as their sample set of one.

Also, people suck and are broken.

I know a lazy black guy and an asian who is a horrible driver. Also a fat Italian and an Irish chick who loves to drink. That's our office!

The thing that strikes me is how those adverts are like a reflection of what you see today.  I mean, advertisers are trying to sell you something, so they have to create highlight a deficiency you have, and a niche that needs to be filled by their product.  If you don't block them completely, watch the commercials of today.  There's a lot of them where the man is some bumbling, clueless asshole, and the woman, who was this thoughtful heroine (usually equipped with the product in question, a testament of her foresight in dealing with this neanderthal), has to save the day.  They just changed the focus based on who it's PC to ridicule.

My point is that the "data set and methodology" used by normal people to determine, say, that women are bad at navigation is the same as that used by racists to determine that <minority> are lazy, or crime prone, or good at math.

  :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear:
(https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/images.owni.fr/pub_vintage_023.jpg)
  :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear: :pedobear:

Yeah.  That's pretty much the worst one there and the only one that I can't get my head around at all.

It's a total 'What The Fuck Were You Thinking' moment.

To be fair, cream stouts were given to nursing mothers because of the high calorie content.  :awesome_for_real:

This. It's not just about the PC aspect; if studies tell them that women 18-35 are shopping and spending the money, that's who they'll aim at.

Mighty big hands for that girl... Old school 'shop!  :why_so_serious:

Just think, if that one guy who makes up all the stereotypes had said Asians were all bad at math and good at driving, it would be no more or less true and people would believe it just as much.

 :why_so_serious:

My favorite stereotype though is the one that says Italians all have mob ties. It's plainly false, there's a group that lobbies against the perception, but it seems like every goddamn Italian person you meet wants you to think it's true. Either their grandfather was in the mob, or they "know a guy" or whatever.

I chalk that one up to the same mysterious cause as every WASP in the country claiming they have a little Native American somewhere or another in their ancestry.

Pears Soap add, still terrifying.

I still don't get what it was supposed to do!  :ye_gods:

I, too, am completely confused as to what the soap one is about.  I couldn't find any indication that there was supposed to be more to that ad, which...totally confuses me.

I'm sure it has something to do with not throwing the baby out with the bath water, but how or why, I don't know.  It's pretty horrifying, but there are some Pears' soap ads from the 19th century that don't make much sense without understanding the advertising campaign that linked soap with the idea of civilization and British colonial policy.

I've read two accounts neither of which sound legit but I'm sharing anyway.

1) around 1897 which is when this shit rolled out, people were supposedly making their own soap and, well, buying pears soap was better than having an accident where the child is doused in lye (yeah, total bullshit)

2) There were some other ads where the general gist was 'the kid won't like taking a bath until he gets in (and experiences the soap)', so an accident in which he can no longer bathe with the super awesome soap is going to make him cry.

Home soap-making mostly stopped in the UK and US in cities before the 1850s or so except in very poor households, partly a consequence of the use of kerosene or other oils for lighting and heating (ashes from wood fires were an important ingredient in home soaps) plus soap was one of the first industrially-produced goods to be commonly available in Western Europe and the US. Plus also Westerners didn't actually wash that often prior to the early 19th Century--it was thought to be bad for your health.  :oh_i_see: (East Asian peoples were totally blown away by the foul stench of Europeans in the early modern period.)

Pears' soap ads were in general pretty mind-boggling in their use of racial imagery, though some other early British soap companies did the same. (There's a 19th C. Gossage's Soap ad that's totally  :ye_gods: showing a face half-white and half-black.)

Like this?

Yeah, Pears' was advertised to the British public as a fundamental aspect of the civilizing process.  Though the ads depict brown people becoming white in a literal sense it was also meant figuratively.

Another example:

Pears' Soap is widely considered the first modern "brand."

I had not considered that particular aphorism related to the picture. Now it makes a sort of sense, but it's still a sick and twisted sense.  :ye_gods:

I'm not sure what problem there is with the safety razor ad.  Hey, use our razor and have baby smooth skin!

So, what?

Overly protective people shocked that they'd advertise a baby holding a razor blade.  That baby could have cut it's throat!  Never mind it's a drawing and not a photo, it's the IDEA that's bad and must be pointed out as such, even though there was no victim or harm done.

Um.  No.

It's saying explicitly that the safety razor is now so safe you can give it to the kid.

Don't be retarded.

No, I get that.  He wanted to know why it was on the site as a bad/ inappropriate ad that wouldn't be run today.