Absolutely agree. I actually skip over these ads with the same disgust I feel towards all things pertaining to the pink, ‘cure’ breast cancer ad contagion. I get what they think they’re saying… I just wish they’d SAY it in a more effective, all inclusive manner.

More than anything else you wrote, I saw little fireworks going off all over the place when I read that these ads are probably for men and not women…I absolutely agree. They pull that same crap with Victorias’ Secret, perfume ads, and practically anything else that could be conveyed in a sexual way…those Dove commercials, for example.

BUT…okay, so there was this article on The Mary Sue showing off Disney’s new “princess” commercial, which was a very similar shtick…it was a cavalcade of girls in various settings at various ages, with different skin colors and body types, to basically the appeal of their product line. It was done to make money, but if the message that it delivers is that some girl out there that didn’t previously think of herself as special suddenly does, then I’d say it’s a good thing. And if Moveon sexes up their ad campaign and it makes more men vote against Romney, I’d say that’s a good thing too.

…except when PETA does it. PETA is just shit at everything they do.

Exactly. Nothing wrong with the message; lots of things wrong with the delivery system.

The women lower themselves by thinking being naked enhances their argument. As far as trust of their own judgement, in this time of many types of inexpensive birth control, WHY all the unwanted pregnancies and abortions? Are women so weak and horny they can’t think about protection?? Or just stupid?.

Yes, I understand that by being frustrated at these women for taking
their clothes off you could make the argument that I am engaging in the
same body policing that these women are railing against from
politicians.

I agree. Most profoundly.

I agree too! But I am still frustrated by it, and I think that’s valid as well.

Agree totally as a man I am not a fan of this either. Actually I think that men should be offended by this from the standpoint that whatever ad agency is making these ads, not only disrespect women, but men too, assuming that if you put a nude woman in an ad then men will pay attention.

The “pink” campaigns are equally as frustrating, I think these ad’s seek to subconsciously disempower women, to treat them as nothing more than frail girly types with all the pink frills. Pink is used to activate the subconscious, pink=genitalia, the sexualization of women and unfortunately young girls that wear this stuff too.

When I see the Victoria Secret “pink” outerwear that is the first thing I think of. I can’t help but think these women are being duped.

No wonder moveon is going belly up.

I will trust you with your body, if you trust me with my Paycheck.

The message would be good if it were true. There is no one trying to stop women from getting contraception. Women know it is accessible and cheap. No one is trying to outlaw abortion.
These losers need to quit lying to women that know better. Only uneducated losers believe this crap.

Great article.

If I had my chioce between the usual BS in political ads and naked women, well I’ll take the women.

Liberals are very gullible and easily lead astray.

So basically,you get it,but you don’t like it.

Well,ain’t that special.

*drink*

My problem with these ads or magazine covers is that, at their heart, they’re actually somewhat cowardly. Seriously, if you think getting naked is REALLY going to make your statement just SOOOOO gosh darn powerful and will make your point SOOOOO gosh darn profound…then get freaking naked already.

It’s like the Dixie Chicks cover above. They should have stripped totally naked…for all to see…and then you just black bag the magazine, so it can be sold on newsstands or wherever. Which, in and of itself, would make it an even bigger media event and it would actually draw more attention to your supposed “cause” because at least THEN people would be asking “what’s in the bag?” and “why are they doing this?” and they’d be more willing to buy the magazine — to rip the covering off — to see you putting your money where your mouth is.

But this silliness where they SAY they are naked when in truth they were REALLY wearing string bikinis at the photo shoot, which were then Photoshopped out…or say they’re naked, but the photo has body parts or props actually covering things up…just seems dumb to me. It’s shock for shock’s sake, but the truth is it is a trick that’s become so tired and cliched that it’s no longer even head turning.

Using naked bodies is an attempt to put a messag out to the incomprendsibly stupid, you know, liberals…

“And if Moveon sexes up their ad campaign and it makes more men vote against Romney, I’d say that’s a good thing too.” If you vote “against” Romney because Moveon put naked women in their ad campaign, it’s just another sign that you were too stupid to vote in the first place. I’d hate to think that somebody’s vote was cancelled out by a moron like you who could be pursuaded by a naked body. Someone spends hours researching the more important aspects of a candidate’s platform, campares policies, proposals, and positions to come to a thoughtful conclusion and take the time to post a vote reflecting the same. All you need to make up your mind is a naked ass. Sad…

That is precisely why i call them Lib’Tards…

Absolutely DISAGREE. Are Sarah and you saying that the time has ‘arrived’ when showing naked human bodies has become INeffective as an attention grabber? Seriously? Because then Sarah and you are being incomprehensibly naive.

Look, Sarah is in the business of posting clips with comments that spark controversy in the reader comments section. That means that there’s a BUSINESS incentive for Sarah to post this, even if she suspect or KNOWS that what she’s posting is crappola.

And you fell for it.

This a great ad. It grabs the attention, not just of those who might identify with the women in it but also men who profess to respect them but actually don’t mean anything of the kind; it CONFRONTS many men with their hypocrisy, but more to the point it’s not aiming at that, it’s aiming at GOTV. That is, it’s aimed at someone markedly different than the typical Rube fanboyz at Mediaite; those idiots are going to vote with their scrota anyway.

You’re being a complete wuss about this. And wrong. AND duped by Sarah Devlin. If Sarah actually believes this, she’s maybe a loyal Mediaite business model salesperson, but she’s got zero understanding of marketing and message.

Oy. MOVEON is not a business, and does not run on a business model. The hint is in the name: MOVEON, as in progressive movement. So the how “belly up” idea is totally misplaced: movement organizations survive as long as they’re relevant in being able to move the conversation towards the values the movement is trying to advance. It doesn’t matter whether that goal is achieved by MOVEON or any one of many other organizations with the same values. The goal is the values, not its own preservation.

And this is all BESIDES the fact that you’re full of crap about MOVEON going “belly up”.

Spin some more; you still have room before your organs start exiting your body.

I wouldn’t “bang” any of these broads – thank god they are NOT actually “naked”. No One gives a crap about you’re bodies honey – I just don’t want to pay for your Birth Control. You don’t want to pay for my Strip Clubs & Cam Model tokens do you??

In 22 days the gravy train of Entitlement & War on Women myth ends….just like the Mayans predicted.

They’re donations are waaaay down.

Jun 13, 2012 … The political action fund for MoveOn.org is poised to have its worst fundraising year since forming in the 2004 election cycle. :)

This all goes to show that:

1) Wingnuts are sex deprived
2) Wingnuts hate their bodies (probably because many are fat and have diabetes)
3) Wingnuts hate allowing women to actually have something to say over their own bodies
4) Wingnuts hate insurance for women’s contraception (i.e., Catholic institutions, allowing businesses to deny that coverage) and yet LOVE across the board insurance for boner pills.
5) Nudity scares the living sh!t out of wingnuts. Imagine if nudity were used as a weapon. We’d be rid of all the stupid wingnuts in America.

It’s no wonder idiots like Darth_Slacker wouldn’t “bang” any of those broads. He’s either a closet homosexual or he can’t get it up. Lucky for him his boner pills are covered.

As the adage goes, sex sells and whether it’s shoes or politics the same is true. I just don’t understand why the signs have to be so big.

Not true at all. There are many who are trying to outlaw abortion. As for contraception, it’s a point about how it should be covered by health insurance. It’s fine and dandy to say you ought to have to pay for it, but they’re paying for health insurance already. That should come with it in the same way that Viagra is covered. This is the 21st century. Birth control ought to be covered. Period.

While I understand the criticism, I think it goes a little too far to say that nudity is always sexual. Guys may have trouble separating the two, which might explain a more negative attitude toward an ad with naked men in it, but that doesn’t mean that it applies to everyone. They’re clearly reaching out to women voters in the ad. It’s about women’s issues.

“By the way, if anyone here is in marketing or advertising…kill
yourself. Thank you. Just planting seeds, planting seeds is all I’m
doing. No joke here, really. Seriously, kill yourself, you have no
rationalisation for what you do, you are Satan’s little helpers. Kill
yourself, kill yourself, kill yourself now. Now, back to the show.
Seriously, I know the marketing people: ‘There’s gonna be a joke comin’
up.’ There’s no f’ing joke. Suck a tail pipe, hang yourself…borrow a
pistol from an NRA buddy, do something…rid the world of your evil
f’ing presence.”
Bill Hicks

Exactly, and concisely.

Sex sells, and ? you want to make that not true? good luck hahahahah

It’s pretty sad that you can be so thoroughly sure of yourself with your head up your ass. I didn’t say that it influenced my decision. I’m not going to vote for Romney because he’s an old money Mormon with a history of closing down his competitors and putting people out of business, he seems to change the party line depending on his audience. he’s using public broadcasting as a scapegoat so that he doesn’t have to make bigger cuts that would hurt his own interests, and his running mate is a douchebag.

But if Moveon can bring in some more votes, I’d appreciate it.

Next time, read. Making assumptions just makes you look like the anus that you are.

They’re doing both.

So that you can read them even on a small TV or an Iphone.

It’s not counterproductive, it’s highly effective.

There’s nothing new under the sun, and I bet you can find probably 50 TV ads with some mother complaining about doing laundry. It’s the same concept, but a different message, different product, etc.

Reading some of your more less than left articles, I’m willing to bet that somewhere deep down there’s another reason why you don’t like this.

;-)

I don’t understand. What makes you think they’re naked behind their signs?

I agree let’s not look over the rules set in place by the faith

Oooohhhhh SHOCKING!!!… if this were 1985. Should’ve done it in vagina costumes. By all accounts they’re the ones objectifying women, reducing us to “lady parts” that are hysterical about free birth control. You’d never see one w/ naked men. Probably trying to inflate this issue since it is FAR from the most important in the election. Also, what is it with liberals and holding up talking points on a sign?

The Dixie Chicks! Forgot all about that controversy.

so they act like promiscuous whores to sell their message ? WTH is wrong with people these days, it will only attract negative attention and it is ridiculous. If you want your rights use the brain that god gave you and close your skankish legs. These are the kind of people that sell their goods for college and think its a good solution…..read a book please learn SOMETHING!

No it should not because it goes against alot of religions which our country is a Christian nation, nost wouldn;t use for health but for comfort. Selfishness really!

“Messag”? “Incomprendsibly”? Learn to spell before attempting to label others “stupid.”

You do realize that Viagra and birth control are not even close to the same thing right? As in, one aids a natural action that for some reason has failed, and one supresses a completely natural *non-disease*. Citing the 21st century does not change this, and forcing others who believe it to be immoral to pay for it is moral violence. We’re telling people they MUST pay for health insurance, they must NOT be charged less if they don’t use it, and that they will be penalized if they do not comply or join in on something they believe is gravely immoral (remember, we’re not talking just contraception (which may or may not be abortifacient), but morning after pill (which often is abortifacient), and sterilizations (which are disfiguring) as well.

People are trying to outlaw abortion not as a war on women, or their bodies (that’s honesly ridiculous, and people should admit it. These people have mothers and wives for heavens sake, and the anti-abortion movement is LED, I repeat LED by women) but as a defense of the babies lives and bodies.

Pregnancy and childbirth show one indisputable truth: in a very serious way, we are all in this together from our very beginnings. We start our lives in our mothers’ bodies, and we are valuable then too. YES pro life people admit this is a burden on the mother, but they are saying we all have social obligations, burdens we must carry for each other’s sake. It’s not easy, it’s among the hardest of social obligations, but there are other tough ones: the military draft, taxes for community/social programs, laws that limit you in order to not overly impose on others (that’s pretty much every law).

Birth control has more in common with the use of anabolic steroids in weight lifting, or blood doping, or sex change operations, than it does to Viagra. If another persons life were not involved, the argument would be VERY strong for it to be allowed. But another life is involved, and that is an overriding concern.

The idiots commenting on this article have basically proved your point. Did you pay them?

That’s what a lot of men said right before their paychecks started being garnished for child support.One way or another, everybody pays.

Oh dear! jag-off-lyn is put off by poor spelling or mistyping…

LOL!

MY CHOICE TO MURDER MY BABY

I am so sick of women who tsk-tsk inanely over some other woman’s meaningless doings… I guess for some of you junior high never ended

The Dixie Chicks ad and the Nia Long ad are fine, but what’s with the ugly chicks in this MoveOn ad? Don’t they know the rules?

I understand the impulse to do something shocking and extreme to get
one’s point across, but couldn’t it be something that leaves sexualizing
women’s bodies in order to sell something (in this case, a political
message) out of it?

http://exclusivehomefurniture.com/

it feels like women are being brought to the table to discuss the
politicization of their bodies in a way that continues to denude them of
their voices and convictions, which should be all they need to make
their point.

http://www.petshoppingforums.com/snuggies-for-dogs/

Every time I hear the paid poster option it reminds me of this little sucky I played baseball with in the early 1960s. One night our team was getting beat 13-1 and he is screaming that the other team paid off the umpires. However, he eventually grew up and saw the error in his logic obviously you have not