Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I'm not generally in favor of "banning" stuff, but maybe Carl's Jr. went a bit too far (maybe NSFW) [View all]redqueen
(115,186 posts)85. LOL, no, just fairness.
Mea culpa, I was thinking of the Paris Hilton ad.
So, anyway, was there any writhing? Did he place the coke can between his legs and squirm? Did it show any close ups of his bulge? His ass? His face as he seductively licked drops off the can?
The fact is, men are simply not treated the same way.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
132 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I'm not generally in favor of "banning" stuff, but maybe Carl's Jr. went a bit too far (maybe NSFW) [View all]
Atman
Jan 2014
OP
I've boycotted Carl's for decades, always will. Kartcher was an anti choice
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2014
#1
There seems to be no end to the hypocrisy of the RW-family-values-anti-gay-anti-women-corporate-
kelliekat44
Jan 2014
#33
Well Pretz, that's fine for you. I grew up where Carl was personally funding
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2014
#71
Their ads are either over the top sex or very mean spirited. I watch their ads and think
OregonBlue
Jan 2014
#15
"Are there any ads with hot-n-sexxxy, speedo-clad men writhing around?" Why, yes, actually...
Atman
Jan 2014
#46
I'm impressed that you have such authority on that posters 'obsession' as you put it
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2014
#122
I agree. There's nothing sexy about that. I actually thought it was pretty yucky
Number23
Jan 2014
#100
Not giving a shit about objectification is a funny way of demonstrating that one likes women. nt
redqueen
Jan 2014
#35
I'll just leave it at GOOD DECISION.... Uggh, objectifying for the "gawd almighty" dollar....
hlthe2b
Jan 2014
#18
No woman could eat that 700 calorie hamburger and drink that 350 calorie soda and still have...
Shoulders of Giants
Jan 2014
#22
Nobody said you had to eat like that every day. But I see the point, regardless. n/t
nomorenomore08
Jan 2014
#89
"Acting is the ability to have an orgasm over shampoo, hamburgers, or cleaning products"
FSogol
Jan 2014
#30
I ate at carls jr. on a road trip once I don't remember being impressed or blown away by it
Arcanetrance
Jan 2014
#37
I guess I'm numb to embarrassing food advertising. Because it doesn't factor in my choices one way
nomorenomore08
Jan 2014
#92
The problem is that stereotyping is so easy, both for those who create the ads and those who watch
nomorenomore08
Jan 2014
#94
Like someone else said, even those who like both fast food burgers and attractive women
nomorenomore08
Jan 2014
#90
Being that you went there for sexist reasons, did you open the door for anyone while there?
The Straight Story
Jan 2014
#103
Here's an ad for Burger King's "BK Super 7-incher"...I don't think it won any sensitivity awards.
Captain Stern
Jan 2014
#111
That, IMHO, is much worse than the silly ad in the OP. It's completely offensive
stevenleser
Jan 2014
#112