Social Question

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

Are you offended by this glorious Benetton campaign?

Asked by Simone_De_Beauvoir (38868 points ) November 18th, 2011

Details here. Clearly, world leaders kissing is causing an uproar but I can’t pick if it’s the homophobia or the ethnocentrism or religion bashing that’s the cause of so many people feeling uncomfortable…which is WHY this particular campaign is a great sociological tool to get at what makes people freak out in our society…should it be pulled? Personally, I think the ‘unhate’ message is great…and all I can say is ‘more tongue!’

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

34 Answers

Blackberry's avatar

I think it’s great. I’m surprised some people’s heads haven’t exploded from all the liberal scum shown all at once: homosexuality, disrespct of ethnocentrism, and disrespect of religion are pretty heavy for close-minded individual to handle all at once.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@Blackberry Maybe they have exploded, we don’t know.

wonderingwhy's avatar

It makes me chuckle. The only thing I could say I find “offensive” would be that, according to the update in the link, he apparently pulled the pope’s shot.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@wonderingwhy Yeah, that lets you know who actually has power.

wundayatta's avatar

There was already a question about this a few days ago. We were asked to say who we would have kissing. I wanted New Gingrich and Michelle Bachman to kiss. Then he could kiss Herman Cain and Rick Perry. Now that would be a fundraiser!

I think people probably don’t like it because it is so disrespectful.

Blackberry's avatar

@wonderingwhy Such BS. A cartoon artist had his shop burned down for drawing Muhammad, and you know what he did? He drew him again, this time kissing a dude. It pisses me off that people have to cave like that.

FutureMemory's avatar

I want them to start blowing each other.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@wundayatta Oh boo, I’ve not been paying close attention…sorry ya’ll. Why is it disrespectful?

reijinni's avatar

not at all.

wundayatta's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Because it is taking images of people (even if they are under the fair use law) and changing the pictures to show them doing something they would probably never do and would feel very uncomfortable doing. But hey—they are politicians. They expect to be disrespected. I just think a lot of people feel very uncomfortable on their behalf.

flutherother's avatar

This is the latest in a series of controversial ads by Benetton which have included the deathbed scene of a man dying of aids, a bloody newborn baby complete with umbilical cord, a collage of genitals and photographs of inmates on death row. The purpose seems to be to get their name hammered into the public consciousness through shock tactics. It is all about advertising and brand awareness and I find the tactics offensive.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@wundayatta oh so this is because people love their politicians? who knew?

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@flutherother Well at least that I can get behind. I say the same about PETA.

ANef_is_Enuf's avatar

I understand why people would get all pissy about it, but it’s hard for me to imagine. Just glancing at the first image made me instantly smile.

FutureMemory's avatar

This may sound strange, but if I were one of these guys I might be offended that I was shown kissing someone other than my spouse.

rebbel's avatar

I believe this was the whole campaign (idea) from Benetton: Make ‘shocking’ photos, be in the world news, get ‘shocked’ reactions world wide, pull it, and witness a weeks during debate (read: ‘free’ publicity).
Obviously (to me anyway) there is nothing wrong with pictures of two people (be they same sex or not, be they world leaders or not) kissing each other.
The fact that some people see it as shocking is shocking to me.
It didn’t raise even an eyebrow of me.
In a newspaper I read about the pulling of the campaign, and in the article they referred to one of the previous ‘shocking’ photo campaigns; a black woman breast feeding a white baby.
What the fuck??

Aethelflaed's avatar

I’m a little bit offended that there isn’t then a “fun” pic at the end of Obama kissing himself.

Jude's avatar

Is it wrong that I got slightly turned on by one?

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@Jude Of course it’s wrong. lol

Aethelflaed's avatar

@Jude No. It’s glorious.

Neizvestnaya's avatar

I don’t find it offensive but I’m also not in favor of computer cut & paste without permission of the people pictured. This goes beyond putting the pope’s head on a chicken body or some such.

This is clearly blurring the line between what is real and what is created. If these were celebrities, they’d be threatening lawsuits, demanding retraction and public apologies.

ccrow's avatar

Not so much offensive in the way you mean, but in the sense “Oh no, not that annoying ad again!!” In which category it has lots of company…

Jude's avatar

Guess which one?

Aethelflaed's avatar

Abbas & Netanyahu

Jude's avatar

Obama & Chavez

pageiv's avatar

The genesis of ad campaign is the picture of Brezhnev kissing Honecker in 1979, also a painting on the Berlin Wall http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_God,_help_me_to_survive_this_deadly_love .

The picture wasn’t distributed as a sign of peace, but one of oppression of the German people by the Soviet Union. I’m not saying the ad campaign has something nefarious behind it, but I find it hard to imagine an ad campaign based of Nazism.

SavoirFaire's avatar

Oh, @pageiv‘s answer makes much more sense than what I thought the inspiration might be.

dannyc's avatar

Not at all. Since it is obviously contrived but creative in its eliciting reaction has a meaning. Instead of embracing that, people look for the negative to bolster their weak arguments for one thing or another. That it offends people is probably a good thing.

perspicacious's avatar

Yes, but it’s not the first time. I stopped buying anything Benetton many years ago.

syz's avatar

Benetton is still around?

OpryLeigh's avatar

I’m certainly not offended by them. I’m fairly indifferent towards them to be honest. I kind of understand the message they are trying to put across but I can also understand why the people in the pictures would be pissed off. I can’t imagine I would be too happy with my pictures being used to support a campaign without my permission.

I also get a bit bored of “shock tactics” if I am honest.

wundayatta's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I can’t for the life of me understand how your response is related to my comment. People may feel uncomfortable about the way their politicians are treated, but that doesn’t mean they “love” them. And surely the supporters of the politicians do, well, support them. And more than supporters have a sense of fairness.

Oh, I don’t know why I bother. You’re just making snark points. Here you go: ten snarks!

Under the Orange Tree

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@wundayatta No, I’m not. Why bother?

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther