Don’t be stupid. Join me in boycotting Diesel. I admit the only article of clothing I own from there came from a Goodwill, but if I walked into a second-hand store tomorrow and found a whole new Diesel wardrobe on the racks, I would have to pass it by.
As long as I can remember, Diesel has produced sensual and edgy ads, featuring notably styalized photography. The world in those ads looked no more realistic than the airbrushed men and women they contained; however, in 2010 Diesel decided to create a series of ads with a brand new feel and look. The inspiration behind this bold move? Be Stupid.
The ads, created by an agencey called Anomaly, won a Grand Prix (second place) at Cannes Film Festival just weeks before they were banned in the U.K. I could not find any evidence that they were banned here in the U.S, but I have never seen them here on the East Coast. The U.K. said they were “indecent and promote anti-social behavior,” according to adweek.blogs.com. What do you think?
It doesn’t look that bad you say? Let’s look a little closer, just for fun.
Pornographic ads have no place on the streets or in between the pages of a magazine. While the girl might be giving a “fuck you” to whoever is behind the camera, she is doing it in a way that puts her body on display as a commodity and reminds women that their only real asset is their sexuality. Worst of all, the ads tagline “Stupid has the balls” suggests that this is the action of an cool and courageous girl.
I would not want anything in this picture coming close to my vagina, but the clutched fingertips of the model seems to suggest that women enjoy an essence of danger and violence in their sexuality. It’s an upseting and dangerous message in a world where 1 in 4 women are already the victim of sexual assault.
This chick is so stupid that she would rather take pictures of her genitalia then protect herself from a lion. I guess the tagline suggests that she is ballsy, but what I see is a vunerable exposed woman and a very excited masculine lion. It’s SO STUPID that I don’t even know what to say about it.
Because that’s what women are for – eating. Once again, reminding us that our sexuality is all we have, a very different message then is found in their ads featuring men.
I mean, this one is downright adorable.
And I would dare say, this does look pretty brilliant…
A lot more brilliant then this broad anyway.
As a collective, the ads show men who are autonomous and in control, while the women are depicted as sexually promiscusous creatures that drink vodka from a shoe. Taglines like, “You’ll Make More Friends,” “Smart Has the Plans, Stupid Has the Stories,’ and “Are You Smart Enough to Be Stupid?” send an obvious message that this is a desirable, fun, and sexy way to behave. After all, you don’t want to be a prude.
Of course, Diesel is not the only clothing manufacturer that includes misogynistic messages in their advertisements. Dockers is blatant about “who should wear the pants.”
Nikon promotes voyeurestic male fantasies…
And FloTV denounces the chance than women, gay men, or anyone unmarried likes to watch sports…
If you needed any more proof that feminism is still necessary, there it is. There are clearly many images in the media that restrict, stereotype, and make light of women’s roles in society. We can do a lot more than buy slacks, perform for men, and “be stupid.” As feminists we need to be aware of what products and brands we are supporting. I wonder if the conservatives who are currently fighting against public funding for abortion realize or even care that their spending habits ultimately put money in the pockets of sexually charged advertisements that promote promiscuous sex, which in turn leads to unwanted pregnancies and the need for abortions? Hmmm. Just a thought.
We have come a long way since the vintage sexist ads of the past, but are the Diesel ads really so different? Or are they just a modern twist on the same patriarchal themes of vintage sexist ads likes these?
It’s up to you to decide. In the meantime, know who you wear and where you money goes. After all, we wouldn’t want to publicly fund something that goes against our beliefs, would we?
ShoutOut! James Madison University 
