Or
Seriously, I want to know. A local publication has refused to run the first ad after a reader complained about the second. I'm not going to tell you what I think just yet. So, in the meantime, please comment (you can do it anonymously, ya know!). See, down there by my signature where it says "comments"? Click there, pass the stupid human test, and leave me your thoughts. I'm counting on you, you know -- I'm giving a presentation on censorship next week! PLEASE!
Thanks.
Love,
Leslie
----------------------> click somewhere over here >>>
Posts
2 comments:
It could be claimed that both ads are in poor taste, but I believe that neither deserves censorship.
Each ad captures our attention through shock value by putting a taboo function of human biology on frank display: either sexuality or excretion. The Hoe ad is somewhat more problematic, since it associates females with the pejorative descriptor "hoe." But it's possible that ads like this make whoredom more socially acceptable, thus removing the stigma attached to human sexuality and eventually fostering greater appreciation of women's rights.
Or I could be completely out to lunch.
Thanks, Earl.
Personally, I find the first ad funny and the second ad somewhat in poor taste, but I wouldn't censor either of them. But I suppose you knew that already.
L
Post a Comment