Scantily Clad women and gun advertisements. acceptable or not?

[dannyr3_8]

Men like guns......

Men like scantily clad women.....

Men like scantily clad women with guns.....seems like a no brainer.




My favorite are the reloading press ads with the attractive model posing next to it.... For some reason it always makes me laugh.

exactly i agree 100% i love scantly clad women with guns and have no problem with using them in advertising and i like them even more when they're holding guns

 

[crazyjennyblack]

I personally don't care for the bikini models with handguns. Totally tasteless. Honestly, at that point, it's more artistic in style to have the woman completely naked. At least then you're appreciating the whole beauty of the female form. The bikini model with a gun is cliche!

The best ads are more like that CZ calendar that was previously posted. Show women dressed decently, even in an alluring manner, going about their daily activities. This brings sex appeal to the product, but in a way that isn't tired and trampy, but can be viewed in a more empowering light.

Companies will always use sex to sell a product, and I'm fine with that. It's part of human nature. However, since firearms companies often represent gun owners in general (at least, in the eyes of the public and media) I think they should strive to go above and beyond the lure of dime-a-dozen trashy pics. Men don't hardly notice, and women turn away. We've seen so many we can't remember them all. But a well-done ad with an attractive woman gets the attention of both men AND women.

 

[MECHAGODZILLA II]

I'll marry either one that armored man showed, this very instant. G-string bikinis-clad models? No, those are obscene period.

 

[Cap'n Jack Burntbeard]

It doesnt matter to me, it neither sells me on the gun or the woman.
But I do love how it causes the puritans to get their panties in a twist.

 

[Strykervet]

I think that there is a line where it becomes inappropriate, but I have yet to find it. Just kidding. Honestly, an attractive woman next to or holding an attractive gun is all good in my book as long as they compliment each other and the woman isn't the center of attention. There is a way of doing this without going "too far" and most(not all) reputable companies stay within the boundaries of what is acceptable and professional.

The "Blue Press" is a good example.

This is what I was thinking.

I think it detracts from the overall ad of the weapon, but it does get your attention, no?

 

[Strykervet]

So I assume you won't mind them using some naked dude's 'nads to sell you a gun?

Well, Captain Jack Harkness and the other 10% of the population might like this. But when you advertise, you try and reach your audience. Shotgun News isn't necessarily aimed towards homosexuals. But it would be no different in my opinion --while at the same time being something I don't really want to look at. But I like freedom, all of it, even if I don't agree. Especially then, because it makes me value it and gives me the impetus to protect it even more.

 

[KevininPa]

Whoa!

There were guns in those ads?!














Seriously, THR members can polarize over anything!

 

[USAF_Vet]

There isn't much wrong with how a company chooses to advertise. However, I find it distracting. While i like looking at the lines and curves of women, when I'm looking at guns, I would rather focus on the lines and curves of the guns.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Wow 200+ responses and over 3,500 views in a day...

Me? Acceptable? Yes.
Effective? Absolutely not.
Disappointing? Most certainly.

If one of my personal favorite manufacturers felt the need to stoop to boobs to sell a firearm, I'd feel let down in whom they believed they were targeting and mildly insulted in the perception that I might be influenced or swayed by skin rather than performance or features.

Now, I'm not talking about pretty women in general but cheap calendar girl lookin' hootchie mamas.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

I'm rather surprised by the sheer numbers of those that would rather not see "scantily clad" women in ads about guns. And to those that think this is an age thing, well, I'm 55 and I rather like it. As some have said, I'm old, not dead. Perhaps the offended can post the ads that offended them, even slightly, and the rest of us can judge for ourselves? Well hey, I have an open mind, you know.

 

[Redlg155]

It seems that this thread has somehow twisted to say that I advocated censoreship. That was not the intent nor was any statement made to that fact. I did ask if these images were a detriment, a far cry from advocating censoreship.

I haven't heard anyone specifially mention whether or not the image in the current shotgun news was crossing the line or not, and hopefully someone will see the issue and comment.

For some reason I think it was "Spikes" but I may be wrong

 

[Shadowdancer]

Better yet... sitting on a pickup truck and drinking a beer.

 

[mgmorden]

It seems that this thread has somehow twisted to say that I advocated censoreship. That was not the intent nor was any statement made to that fact. I did ask if these images were a detriment, a far cry from advocating censoreship.

I haven't heard anyone specifially mention whether or not the image in the current shotgun news was crossing the line or not, and hopefully someone will see the issue and comment.

In the title of the whole thread you ask if it was "acceptable", with the absolute implied possibility being that such images might be "unacceptable". Typically, "unacceptable" isn't the same as being a detriment - it has undertones that suggest action should be taken.

You also in your second point alude to "Crossing a line".

These are all flag words to first amendment supporters. They hit our ears about like "common sense gun laws" hit the ears of 2nd amendment supporters.

You have to understand that to many people, when it comes to anything that appears in print, there is no "line" that can be crossed. There is no "unacceptable". There is no "obscene", or "immoral". A company can advertise however they darned well please and I don't care. Sexy women sell things to guys. They use that - its sucessful.

BTW, to all those snickering about "what if they used a man" - guess what - THEY DO. They don't sweat them up and put them in skimpy clothes because that doesn't work, but they still show all the tacticool swat guys. What do you think the Marlboro Man was all about?

They just do what works. They show women that you want and guys that you want to BE - and I personally couldn't care less.

 

[22-rimfire]

Field & Stream magazine was mentioned... I checked the Feb. 2012 issue. Full page ad for male enhancement, 1/3 page ad for some sort of chemical to get more affection, 1/4 pg ad for adult products, several full page ads for medication... must be tough for these magazines to stay in business.

Not one ad for a firearm with a nicely dressed woman, but there was a Toyota sponsered ad for preserving our wilderness areas that has a woman holding a shovel over her head.

 

[wojownik]

A couple of recent generally marketing studies hint that sex might not sell as well as folks might assume. Personally, I think its an insult to my intelligence. If you have a good product, show it, focus on it. Also, there is a growing market of female gun buyers. Dumb to alienate a significant potential market segment.

 

[oneounceload]

For those with the repressed sexual issues,I feel sorry for you. However, for you to try and force those depressions on the Reston us borders on dictatorial. It is real simple, turn this page and do not worry about the souls of other rest of us
Censorship because YOU don't like it's a dangerous slope to be on,someone might decide
Certain religious books are dangerous and in need of censoring. Then what?

Don't force your morals on me,and I will abide the same

 

[Shadowdancer]

A couple of recent generally marketing studies hint that sex might not sell as well as folks might assume. Personally, I think its an insult to my intelligence. If you have a good product, show it, focus on it. Also, there is a growing market of female gun buyers. Dumb to alienate a significant potential market segment.

Beer companies advertise that you are going to get laid if you drink their brand of beer.... not burp or pee.

There are two types of ads: Image or Factual. Image tries to sell you on what ownership will do for your life, while factual is about why the product is superior. If the firearms are functional, they all basically do the same thing... put lead downfield. But if owning a Colt over a Kimber might get you laid.... well then... that is something different!

 

[goon]

Personally... who cares?
Kahr runs that "Slim is sexy" campaign... and you know what? I don't think slim is all that sexy and I don't feel an overwhelming desire to run out and buy a Kahr. If I buy a Kahr, it will be because I believe they are making a reliable defensive handgun that will serve my needs at the price I can pay. It won't have anything to do with their models.

 

[shockwave]

Given that this thread is up to almost 10 pages now, I'd say the rationale for placing firearms in apposition with attractive women is a smart marketing move.

It's a staple in every industry. In car mags, you see bikini-clad gals holding mufflers. You even find this sort of thing in durable medical equipment catalogs.

The sad thing about our society is that we're inundated with ads. The competition for your eyeballs is fierce. Almost any piece of real estate is fair game for a logo. Advertisers want their goods front and center in your vision, and you are understandably sick of it.

As a result, you've learned to "tune out" ads wherever you see them. Advertisers usually know this. So they try shock, humor, and sex - whatever it takes to get your attention. Would you expect them to behave any differently?

 

[btg3]

Each of those "scantily clad women" is somebody's daughter. If it's your daughter, do you still find it "acceptable" ? I surely would not. And I would not wish it for anyone else's daughter. Unfortunately sex does sell, but the price we all pay is not the one that's advertised.

It does not do 2A any favors either. Combining sex and violence is a known social problem. No way are you going to eliminate the association of guns with violence, so it is not a stretch to say the subject advertising is anti-social and feeds the wrong appetites. As a result, 2A comes under additional attack with the argument that guns should have no place in our society.

 

[Rollis R. Karvellis]

The only gun rag I, get now is American Rifleman, and they have sexy girls, and blue pill adds also. Dillon put's hot chicks on, and in his catalog's for the same reason everyone else does, and I, enjoy looking at them. If I, can convince my wife to walk around in her skimppie's while I, reload, or shoot, or just watch tv I, would be happy. But for some reason when I, say something about it she roll's her eye's, and walk's away mumbling about dragging knuckle's. Not sure what that is about.

 

[mgmorden]

Each of those "scantily clad women" is somebody's daughter. If it's your daughter, do you still find it "acceptable" ? I surely would not. And I would not wish it for anyone else's daughter.

Logical fallacy: Appeal to Emotion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion

You might as well be arguing that guns should be outlawed because they are used to shoot school kids.

The fact that it's somebody's daughter is completely irrelevant. If you're married, your wife is somebody's daughter. I'm sure your father-in-law doesn't want to know what goes on behind your bedroom doors, but that doesn't make it wrong.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Where do the monthly Dillon Blue Press girls fall on the "tasteful" scale? For me, they are about a 10 on the "good taste". I don't find them objectionable at all.

 

[oneounceload]

Sorry btg3, those girls are also adults and free to make their own choices. You seem to think they did not have a say in their appearing in these ads.....a tad out of touch, eh?

Many a well paid movie star and runway model got their start doing ads like these. Good for them for making a buck and advancing their careers

 

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

Each of those "scantily clad women" is somebody's daughter. If it's your daughter, do you still find it "acceptable" ?

I have to laugh whenever I hear/see that remark. My daughter has posed for MANY "shots" such as the ones that are being talked about so, to answer your inane question, Yes sir I surely do! My oldest daughter is not only very beautiful and graced with her grandmothers lines (yes sir my mother in law was one serious looker) but also carried straight A's in HS and Col. For someone to "take advantage" of her would be a feat unto itself. She is perfectly comfortable with her looks and see's no problem at all if someone wants to pay her extravagant amounts of money to take pictures of her for wearing something she would freely wear at the damn beach. You prudes need to get your selves out of the caves and start realizing that puritanical beliefs belong in the damn dark ages.