Pro: high production value, parody of old-spice guy
Con: plugging the classlessness that is the "page-3-girl"

Conclusion: Meh.

^ agree. Also, she's not confident and over-the-top enough.

>> ^rychan:

^ agree. Also, she's not confident and over-the-top enough.


Yeah 'cause that'd be real attractive, a female with the exact mannerisms and attitude as the spice GUY. They're targeting a demographic here best to keep to stereotypes/gender role expectations blah ceterah

My dreamgirl does not struggle reading a teleprompter.

My dreamgirl would never encounter a teleprompter.

Fap fap fap anyway!

>> ^quantumushroom:

Fap fap fap anyway!


Now back to me!

Sure, but who was looking at her eyes?

>> ^kymbos:

My dreamgirl does not struggle reading a teleprompter.

I long to live in a world where women don't sell themselves and men don't buy them.

(or, you know, where human beings can't be considered commodities at all)

"Look at me, now wank off, now look back at me."

What are you holding in your hand?

.. How much would you pay for that?
>> ^Gallowflak:

I long to live in a world where women don't sell themselves and men don't buy them.
(or, you know, where human beings can't be considered commodities at all)

>> ^Gallowflak:

I long to live in a world where women don't sell themselves


If you have a job, you sell yourself everyday. The only difference between you and the page 3 girl, ignoring morality judgements, is the commodity on offer.

*wooden
*soundsabitthick

Her tits need to be freaking huge

Tags for this video have been changed from 'old spice, page 3, sun, coconuts' to 'old spice, page 3, sun, coconuts, rosie jones' - edited by NetRunner

Swap her into the "Do you want to feel my boobs" video, and I think they'd get more takers.

Next step in viral marketing: The Old Spice Guy/Girl offspring selling baby products.

*monoclesmile

>> ^Asmo:

If you have a job, you sell yourself everyday. The only difference between you and the page 3 girl, ignoring morality judgements, is the commodity on offer.

I understand your point, but that's what I was hinting at in the part of my message that you didn't quote; "(or, you know, where human beings can't be considered commodities at all)"

For the record, though, I'm a composer, so the dynamics are rather different. I also take issue with the idea that there's no difference between a "normal" job and being a page 3 girl; one of these requires a more complete resignation of dignity.

I live in a world where this woman can get well paid by showing her bewbs or not, as she chooses, and I get to not care either way.

Dignity? What is this false concept you speak of? Do these women not have dignity? If a woman feels comfortable exposing her body to untold masses, why should it be considered giving up dignity? Why is she no longer worthy of respect just for exposing what is the most natural thing on the planet?

>> ^Gallowflak:

>> ^Asmo:
If you have a job, you sell yourself everyday. The only difference between you and the page 3 girl, ignoring morality judgements, is the commodity on offer.
I understand your point, but that's what I was hinting at in the part of my message that you didn't quote; "(or, you know, where human beings can't be considered commodities at all)"
For the record, though, I'm a composer, so the dynamics are rather different. I also take issue with the idea that there's no difference between a "normal" job and being a page 3 girl; one of these requires a more complete resignation of dignity.

whateva, my girlfriend is hotter and a real redhead

My dreamgirl would never sit on my supercar; she'd be driving me around in it feeding me more alcohol.

Hate this argument cause it's not that simple and you know it.

This "work" is based completely on outward appearance.
[Outward Appearance = Self Image]

Self-image directly effects self-esteem.
[Dignity = Esteem]

Not to mention, humans engage in work because it gives us meaning.
[Meaningful work = Happiness]
~~

If she views being objectified as meaningful work then she's likely happy and feelings quite dignified. "Look at me! I'm a smokin' hot model"

But as her outward appearance diminishes, so will her work, followed by her esteem.

The majority of females likely think being objectified is NOT meaningful work.
That same majority likely think being a composer is relatively more meaningful.

Hence the greater automatic resignation of personal esteem [or dignity]Gallowflak mentioned.
~~

Also, that picture of Amazonian tribal women is a non sequitur.

They're not being objectified by their culture for purposes of employment.

[In effect, what you're implying is "Being objectified for paper currency is the most natural thing on the planet!"]



>> ^MarineGunrock:

Dignity? What is this false concept you speak of? Do these women not have dignity? If a woman feels comfortable exposing her body to untold masses, why should it be considered giving up dignity? Why is she no longer worthy of respect just for exposing what is the most natural thing on the planet?

She's certainly selling *sexuality.

Adding video to channels (Sexuality) - requested by brycewi19.

My dream girl doesn't have to look down to remember what it is she's sitting on.

Some humans engage in work to give themselves meaning. They have my pity. The rest of us engage in work to provide for a family, the family giving the meaning. A lottery winner that sits around all day could have a ton of meaning to their life and never work a single day. Your argument the simplistic view of a philosophical debate that you have twisted to fit to try and convey your meaning here.

Also by the time her "appearance" diminishes she might have moved on to something else, or maybe by the time it happens she'll be too old to care anymore. I'm sure you can't predict this woman's or anyone else's life. And the self-justification of your own work is so transparent to a point of hilarity. Composer make music. Music is art. This women is part of photography. Photography is art. Are you implying you art> her art? Every musician on the radio is a composer. When you cure cancer you can pat yourself on the back.>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

Hate this argument cause it's not that simple and you know it.
This "work" is based completely on outward appearance.
[Outward Appearance = Self Image]
Self-image directly effects self-esteem.
[Dignity = Esteem]
Not to mention, humans engage in work because it gives us meaning.
[Meaningful work = Happiness]
~~
If she views being objectified as meaningful work then she's likely happy and feelings quite dignified. "Look at me! I'm a smokin' hot model"
But as her outward appearance diminishes, so will her work, followed by her esteem.
The majority of females likely think being objectified is NOT meaningful work.
That same majority likely think being a composer is relatively more meaningful.
Hence the greater automatic resignation of personal esteem [or dignity]Gallowflak mentioned.
~~
Also, that picture of Amazonian tribal women is a non sequitur.
They're not being objectified by their culture for purposes of employment.
[In effect, what you're implying is "Being objectified for paper currency is the most natural thing on the planet!"]

>> ^MarineGunrock:
Dignity? What is this false concept you speak of? Do these women not have dignity? If a woman feels comfortable exposing her body to untold masses, why should it be considered giving up dignity? Why is she no longer worthy of respect just for exposing what is the most natural thing on the planet?

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
But as her outward appearance diminishes, so will her work, followed by her esteem.

You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about her psychological health.

Why is it assumed that people who are comfortable gaining income from their physical appearance are mentally weaker than those who do not? Would she be happier about her aging if she never had the opportunity to profit from her temporary youth?

she was talking?

@MarineGunrock

The idea that you think dignity is a false concept makes me retch.

If a woman is comfortable exposing her body to untold masses for the sake of giving them boners and getting money in return, then I wish her all the best. I didn't say she wasn't worthy of respect, I said that prostituting oneself requires a greater resignation of one's dignity than a more typical job. You are agreeing to your body being used for the sexual satisfaction of others, so that you can get currency.

My original comment stands. A society in which women cannot be consumed as products, and men are not willing to do so, would be just that little bit closer to utopia. Humankind's approach and reaction to sexuality is enormously dysfunctional.

I'm a creature of principle. I believe that there are human traits, values, virtues and ideals that are worthy of exaltation, in spite of the lack of any objective authority. Our unique position as intelligent agents is one of great dignity and responsibility, and we must require the most exacting standards of ourselves. I think that having a market for human beings as products for arousal is disgusting and must be done away with, as well as people as products in general.

@Stu

"Some humans engage in work to give themselves meaning. They have my pity. The rest of us engage in work to provide for a family, the family giving the meaning. A lottery winner that sits around all day could have a ton of meaning to their life and never work a single day. Your argument the simplistic view of a philosophical debate that you have twisted to fit to try and convey your meaning here.

Also by the time her "appearance" diminishes she might have moved on to something else, or maybe by the time it happens she'll be too old to care anymore. I'm sure you can't predict this woman's or anyone else's life. And the self-justification of your own work is so transparent to a point of hilarity. Composer make music. Music is art. This women is part of photography. Photography is art. Are you implying you art> her art? Every musician on the radio is a composer. When you cure cancer you can pat yourself on the back."

I'm confused as to how much of this is directed at me, but obviously the last part of the second paragraph applies. Fine.

If you're actually interested in a discussion rather than just venting vitriol then you might want to do a better job of showing it. Still, I appreciate the direction about curing cancer. I'll get right on that.

"And the self-justification of your own work is so transparent to a point of hilarity."

It's not self-justification at all... you seem to have misunderstood me. I was accused by @Asmo of being afflicted by the same tyranny of (wage slavery?) as the woman about whom I was commenting. It's simply not the same deal. As for the rest, non sequitur. Naught else need be said.

But how dare you declare that you reserve pity for those who work to give themselves meaning? And how dare you declare yourself as part of a majority in finding meaning in family?

You guys are going on about philosophosilogy when there's boobies?

I didn't make any assumptions.

I proposed a hypothetical scenario in which this lady is extremely vain and derives most of her happiness from that fact that she is attractive and a model.

If she were a person like that..
["IF" being the key word]

She would likely be less happy as her body became less attractive and the modeling work & income she enjoyed came less frequently.

I think you may have misunderstood me..
As nothing I said implies less attractive people would be happier about aging.

[Since aging would likely make them uglier. heh. = P]
>> ^Psychologic:

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
But as her outward appearance diminishes, so will her work, followed by her esteem.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about her psychological health.
Why is it assumed that people who are comfortable gaining income from their physical appearance are mentally weaker than those who do not? Would she be happier about her aging if she never had the opportunity to profit from her temporary youth?

^All you philosophical/psychological yappers up there, at least have the dignity to format your textwalls into ASCII boobs.

Thanks.

I feel the need to point this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtPGIzLuBVQ&feature=player_embedded#!

Yes, women can sell themselves as objects all they want and still retain more dignity than a lot of people ever had.

is confidence and boisterousness an exclusively male mannerism? what about confidence do you find unfeminine exactly?? best to keep your personal preference for meek, dull women out of this.

also, i'm trying to decide if this display of flesh for advertising is anymore damning than the old spice dude. i'm not personally offended by either of them really and i'm a raging feminist, maybe it's because i have no idea what a page 3 girl is.

i'm with dghandi on this one, meh.

also, i'm pretty offended by misogyny in the media generally, and advertising and entertainment that degrades my entire gender and what not, but i'm more offended that people are sold as labor commodities to walmart for minimum wage than i am that this lady is parading around hinting at nudity. i bet she's being treated with more respect by her employer than hundreds of millions of workers around the world.


>> ^rosekat:

>> ^rychan:
^ agree. Also, she's not confident and over-the-top enough.

Yeah 'cause that'd be real attractive, a female with the exact mannerisms and attitude as the spice GUY. They're targeting a demographic here best to keep to stereotypes/gender role expectations blah ceterah

Upvote, even though (maybe because?) I found the comments more interesting than the video.

Just to throw my 2 cents into the ring, I agree with Gallowflak--it would be nice if we could make the world a place where people don't feel the need to dehumanize themselves in order to make a decent living. And conversely, if people didn't think it was okay to objectify and dehumanize other human beings, there wouldn't be a market for such behavior in the first place.

There's nothing wrong with the naked human form. But I think there is something terribly wrong with reducing a thinking, feeling, human being to a just a pair of boobs (or a nice set of pecs as the case may be).

There's something particularly sad about it to me when someone intentionally reduces themselves that way. Certainly they are free to do so. But I find it hard to believe that the best potential they have to offer the world is their biological endowments.

>> ^ryanbennitt:

My dream girl doesn't have to look down to remember what it is she's sitting on.


Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! Comment of the day

"... just recently finished college where she achieved four A levels and an AS in psychology, theater studies, media studies, critical thinking, and general studies. "

Obviously she's not stupid and has more to offer than just her goodies. Maybe she actually enjoys what she does?>> ^SDGundamX:

There's something particularly sad about it to me when someone intentionally reduces themselves that way. Certainly they are free to do so. But I find it hard to believe that the best potential they have to offer the world is their biological endowments.

Gunrock, what you still fail to understand or acknowledge is..

HER JOB is to be EXCLUSIVE WANK MATERIAL in order TO ATTRACT MORE EYES to the gossip in the SUN tabloid.

She's not offering her general knowledge of a particular subject.
She's not offering technical skills in a particular discipline.
She's offering her tits and hips for display in exchange for money.

She's paid to objectify herself. Meanwhile, most of us are taught that objectifying other humans is immoral.

So it doesn't matter if she's a rocket scientist that dicovered a cure for cancer, aids, alcohol & nicotine addiction, world hungry, global warming AND the lost city of Atlantis..

..if her job & what everyone knows her for.. is givin' handies behind the local bowling alley.


[Edit: I'm not equating prostitution with modeling. But it's objectification all the same.]


>> ^MarineGunrock:

"... just recently finished college where she achieved four A levels and an AS in psychology, theater studies, media studies, critical thinking, and general studies. "
Obviously she's not stupid and has more to offer than just her goodies. Maybe she actually enjoys what she does?

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

...Meanwhile, most of us are taught that objectifying other humans is immoral

Wait. . . have you seen your avatar image? Or are you pro-immorality? I'm confused.

@Entropt: LOL

@GenjiKilpatrick: I acknowledge all of that. Why does it matter if she enjoys doing what she does?

Well the discussion Gallowflak brought up was about dignity/esteem not immorality

I was attempting to make the point that:

Even if she's secure in the fact she's on her way to reaching her potential..

..being sold as an object, even if you enjoy it thoroughly, has its limits.

Humans have complex emotions and thoughts and self-images. Objects don't.

Hence why esteem will suffer inevitably. ..in most cases.
>> ^entr0py:


Wait. . . have you seen your avatar image? Or are you pro-immorality? I'm confused.

would it injury your self esteem if people paid you strut around topless... like as a side job? i doubt it.



>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

Well the discussion Gallowflak brought up was about dignity/esteem not immorality
I was attempting to make the point that:
Even if she's secure in the fact she's on her way to reaching her potential..
..being sold as an object, even if you enjoy it thoroughly, has its limits.
Humans have complex emotions and thoughts and self-images. Objects don't.
Hence why esteem will suffer inevitably. ..in most cases.
>> ^entr0py:

Wait. . . have you seen your avatar image? Or are you pro-immorality? I'm confused.

Funny how this is pretty much the exact same video as the one with the Old Spice guy -- and yet you didn't hear anyone crying that he was being objectified. Why is it okay for a guy to do this, but crass exploitation when a woman does it?

The implication seems to be that any woman in this position is somehow a victim who needs to be protected -- but of course a guy doing the exact same thing is just a cool dude bein' awesome. It can't possibly be that this woman is comfortable with her sexuality and likes being admired. No -- she's a victim of our terrible, terrible society who needs to be protected from her own bad choices. But a guy doing the exact same thing? Awesome, man. Rock on.

Seems like a double standard to me. And more than a little insulting to women.

granted, in the context of these videos ... i pretty much agree with you.

but i was talking with a friend last night about sex in advertising and when it crosses the line from benign to misogynistic. i think it's something that has to be viewed as an aggregate. like, one single beer commercial or one single playboy is not that big of deal, but 3 generations of constant negative and unrealistic images of women in the media is damning and takes its toll on our culture at large. and i think it's impact is (mostly) negative.

and of course, i recognize that there is a harmful and unrealistic ideal of manliness yelling at us on our tv sets as well. but i'm not sure if it's as big of a problem. it might be, i don't live my life as a man. maybe it's a struggle that is more internalized.


>> ^Sarzy:

Funny how this is pretty much the exact same video as the one with the Old Spice guy -- and yet you didn't hear anyone crying that he was being objectified. Why is it okay for a guy to do this, but crass exploitation when a woman does it?
The implication seems to be that any woman in this position is somehow a victim who needs to be protected -- but of course a guy doing the exact same thing is a just cool dude bein' awesome. It can't possibly be that this woman is comfortable with her sexuality and likes being admired. No -- she's a victim of our terrible, terrible society who needs to be protected from her own bad choices. But a guy doing the exact same thing? Awesome, man. Rock on.
Seems like a double standard to me. And more than a little insulting to women.

>> ^Sarzy:

Funny how this is pretty much the exact same video as the one with the Old Spice guy -- and yet you didn't hear anyone crying that he was being objectified. Why is it okay for a guy to do this, but crass exploitation when a woman does it?


I disagree. The old spice commercials were tongue-in-cheek and meant to parody stereotypes, whereas this is just wank material pandereing to beer swilling sport jocks.

Yet it also reached #1 so I guess it panders to lonely internet nerds also.

Your arrogance and presumption don't make me retch (I'm not given to hysterical hyperbole on the internet), but it says nothing good about you as a person...

You give the whole game away when you use the term 'prostituting'. Oh, you can respect her okay just as long as everyone knows that she's a whore... Very tolerant of you. /eyeroll

And your utopian world view? Well I don't know if you've heard about the whole women's suffrage movement, or the sexual revolution, but your archaic ideas of morality (and your hauty superiority) are remnants of a bygone era. I wonder how you deal with nudity in art, such as http://www.artenuda.com/paintings1.php.

You're not a creature of principle, you're a creature of prejudice. You're just too self righteous to admit it.

ps. Anytime you'd like to submit your 'body' of work for critical appraisal, we can make determinations on whether we think you're job has any dignity... Wonder if any commercial jingles will appear... X D

>> ^Gallowflak:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/MarineGunrock" title="member since July 13th, 2007" class="profilelink"><strong style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255);">MarineGunrock
The idea that you think dignity is a false concept makes me retch.
If a woman is comfortable exposing her body to untold masses for the sake of giving them boners and getting money in return, then I wish her all the best. I didn't say she wasn't worthy of respect, I said that prostituting oneself requires a greater resignation of one's dignity than a more typical job. You are agreeing to your body being used for the sexual satisfaction of others, so that you can get currency.
My original comment stands. A society in which women cannot be consumed as products, and men are not willing to do so, would be just that little bit closer to utopia. Humankind's approach and reaction to sexuality is enormously dysfunctional.
I'm a creature of principle. I believe that there are human traits, values, virtues and ideals that are worthy of exaltation, in spite of the lack of any objective authority. Our unique position as intelligent agents is one of great dignity and responsibility, and we must require the most exacting standards of ourselves. I think that having a market for human beings as products for arousal is disgusting and must be done away with, as well as people as products in general.

@Asmo

I do apologize. I don't think I've ever gotten under someone's skin as quickly as that with as little contribution from me. Still, this is the internet. I'm not going to comment on your criticisms of my character because it's not my place to do so, nor would it serve any real purpose, but I can at least respond to your actual argument.

On to it...

First up!

"You give the whole game away when you use the term 'prostituting'. Oh, you can respect her okay just as long as everyone knows that she's a whore... Very tolerant of you. /eyeroll"

Wikipedia : "Prostitution is the act or practice of providing sexual services to another person in return for payment. People who execute such activities are called prostitutes."

The rigid and accurate definition of a prostitute is someone who engages in sexual intercourse for money. Maybe I'll have to concede that one to you... What should I call it? Page 3 girl? Pin-up?

Second!

Any mention of "utopia" was purely rhetorical. Come on - you don't need me to elaborate on that. I do happen to have heard of the suffragettes and have been a lifelong feminist. I'm not opposing sexual expression. I'm not opposing nudity. I'm not opposing female sexual liberty. I'm certainly not opposing art depicting nudity and it's completely insane of you to even suggest any of these things. I oppose the sexual objectification, commercialization and sale of women, and I believe it is destructive and reflective of an inherent weakness of the human species.

I bear the burden of expressing myself accurately, but you seem to have taken misinterpretation to an expert level.

So she's a whore, that's her choice. I just like to watch her coconuts and if she gets payed for it, even better.

Did you forget or did you not know about male models?

Stop bitching about one if you're not going to bitch about the other.

EDIT: it appears that HTML is not working properly right now. Just google "male abercrombie" and search for images.

>> ^Gallowflak:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Asmo" title="member since July 17th, 2008" class="profilelink">Asmo
I oppose the sexual objectification, commercialization and sale of women, and I believe it is destructive and reflective of an inherent weakness of the human species.

>> ^Gallowflak:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Asmo" title="member since July 17th, 2008" class="profilelink">Asmo
I do apologize. I don't think I've ever gotten under someone's skin as quickly as that with as little contribution from me. Still, this is the internet. I'm not going to comment on your criticisms of my character because it's not my place to do so, nor would it serve any real purpose, but I can at least respond to your actual argument.
On to it...
First up!
"You give the whole game away when you use the term 'prostituting'. Oh, you can respect her okay just as long as everyone knows that she's a whore... Very tolerant of you. /eyeroll"
Wikipedia : "Prostitution is the act or practice of providing sexual services to another person in return for payment. People who execute such activities are called prostitutes."
The rigid and accurate definition of a prostitute is someone who engages in sexual intercourse for money. Maybe I'll have to concede that one to you... What should I call it? Page 3 girl? Pin-up?
Second!
Any mention of "utopia" was purely rhetorical. Come on - you don't need me to elaborate on that. I do happen to have heard of the suffragettes and have been a lifelong feminist. I'm not opposing sexual expression. I'm not opposing nudity. I'm not opposing female sexual liberty. I'm certainly not opposing art depicting nudity and it's completely insane of you to even suggest any of these things. I oppose the sexual objectification, commercialization and sale of women, and I believe it is destructive and reflective of an inherent weakness of the human species.
I bear the burden of expressing myself accurately, but you seem to have taken misinterpretation to an expert level.


You'll have to give the 'fastest under the skin' award to MG, he got you retching didn't he? X D

1. You didn't actually contradict the "as long as everyone knows that she's a whore" bit... As I said in my first post, "leaving morality judgements aside". You just haven't managed to do that and continue to try and impress your version of morality on her choice of job. Side note, I bet with that video she's probably garnered more world wide attention than your compositions have. Must sting a little to see someone get so much attention for something as simple as getting their kit off and having a large rack. =)

Side note, an old dear friend of mine does pole dancing and burlesque as a hobby. Genuinely loves it, bit of an exhibitionist. I suppose she's a whore as well?

2. As a lifelong feminist, you should recognise and respect that women have the right to choose to portray themselves sexually or even sell their bodies if they so wish. While you might disagree with the decision, would not do so yourself (assuming your an actual woman rather than one of those poser male feminists), or even lament the fact that sexual appetites have created a demand for such things, who are you to cast stones at her choice? You presume that you have some sort of moral high ground to stare down your nose at her. You do not.

@MarineGunrock

If you want to extend the scope of this discussion to cover men as well, I'd be happy to do so. It didn't seem immediately relevant... they're certainly part of the same issue, but they're different aspects of it, and we were dealing with the case which pertains to this sift.

@Asmo

Stop acting like a child. If you're actually willing to have a discussion on this subject, then I'd be perfectly happy to take you up on the opportunity. Until then, don't waste my time.

Yep, I'm definitely detecting a sandy vag there. Mebbe if someone got their top off more often they'd be less uptight...

1 more comment have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.