The other sort of assumption you can do is jump to gut conclusions and say that sex doesn’t sell because that would be repugnant, and throw it out the window. But that seems counterproductive.

Actually, I can think of an example where it is known to have worked: Promoting condoms in Africa. That’s probably a bit of an obvious example, but the nonprofits that tried to push condoms to slow the spread of HIV did indeed find that sexy condoms were a lot more effective than healthy condoms (I’m simplifying it slightly obviously). I’m sure that doesn’t make you feel any better if you’re dying of AIDS, but it’s good for all the people without it.

But like I said, is it not worth doing a sexy breast cancer campaign to fund breast cancer research? I can think of good reasons why not, some of which Xeni pointed out and some of my own. But I’m not dead certain the ends don’t justify the means, at least here.

These ads are for healthy young men and women. They’re not really directed towards women with breast cancer at all. If you lose all of your feminine virility, these ads don’t exactly ring very true to you. But of course the point isn’t to get your money, you already lost all yours (and probably continue to lose it). The point is that the ads are for people who would otherwise be unaware of or not care about breast cancer. And for them, it’s very effective.

I’ll draw the analogy to condoms. Condoms are sexy and slow the spread of HIV. If you’re an AIDS patient, do you want your cause being promoted with sexy couples having hot sex? Probably not. But people still can have sexy condoms. We’re talking about early stage prevention here. We’re telling nubile young women to protect their femininity. If you make mammograms gross and sickly, young women won’t want them. If you put pictures of dying AIDS children on condoms, people won’t want to use them.

As Heinlein said: “The whole principle is wrong; it’s like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can’t eat steak.”

Point being, it probably works. But for you, that’s no comfort.

Man that comment feels so disjointed. But I said most of what I meant, even if disorganized.

And in breast cancer context it makes it totally tasteless (well, at least to me). On the other hand, I would totally cheer for similar types of ads showing how a woman with mastectomy is still as sexy and womanly as before.

Come to think of it, maybe that was her point in the first place.

It is more like reminding you to take care of your eyes because it is awesome to have 20-20 vision. Nothing wrong with that.

You say that it is offensive and in bad taste, I disagree with you. Very well, each to it’s own.
I don’t see how my gender makes difference.

Here’s an example of an ALS commercial that does something similar:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfN4tZI0RDg

I’m sure lots of people with ALS don’t love being reminded of the fact that they’re now unable to walk, and it sort of trivializes the severity of the symptoms of the disease. But it catches the attention and awareness of the viewer. 

Do you see women doing what the advert says? Do you walk around with your hand in your pants. Wanking it, jumping around, squishing your nuts, fondling them all the time? (Hmm… why did I assume you were a male? Your text just sounded like there is no way in #!#”%# that a woman would have written it, but I could of course be wrong.) 

But this is just a variation of “the end justifies the means”, and I do not agree with that. At some point you start to sell short. And is there really any awareness raising in any of the posters above? Seems more like just cheap shots to me.

I don’t have breast cancer (as far as I know), but I as a woman am offended by posters like the ones above. Especially the last one. I’m also going WTF, it’s seriously offensive and wrong on so many levels I don’t even know where to begin. “So keep them safe, you lucky bitch.” What… the… FUCK!?!?!?!?

But most of all… they seem to imply that what is important in a woman are her breasts. Not all women are born with massive honkers, not all women are able to keep them, and apparently that makes them non-interesting. But who cares about the women anyway… what is important is the boobies… massive ones… for men to oogle and touch (2nd base and that pile of shit of “If I had boobies” poster). Poor men… cancer threatening the female boobies. (How about a poster, once in awhile, raising the awareness of male breast cancer?)

Presenting a different point of view should not be over simplified and taken to mean that my opinion is to condone this activity. It means only that different people, all with personal experience in this issue, have different opinions. As such, as final determination on the propriety of these types of media messages should be informed by both sides of the argument.

As such, I am myself somewhat ambivalent: My self image as a “man” is not strongly connected to this part of my anatomy, and my risk of breast cancer is significantly less than a female might face, so I am skeptical of any initial “gut” reaction I have on an issue that I am less likely to be able understand from the inside. I recognize the potential negative gender stereotyping in this issue, but I balance that with the idea that women are beautiful, and why should celebrating that beautify in connection with a campaign to combat breast cancer automatically be a negative thing? But is this type of media “celebrating” or “exploiting”? I’m not sure. To me, it seems like a grey area, as typified by the differing opinions of those who suffer form this disease. Hence my own ambivalence.

So, you see, not just a flat “Oh it must be okay then”. Thinking that based on my original comment is too pat and over simplified. It is easy to attribute the opposite opinion to anyone who may disagree with your own stance, but in this case the truth is much more nuanced.

It’s like raising money for the partially-blind by going on about how awesome it is to have 20-20 vision.

I’ve seen some light-hearted awareness campaigns that focus on the issue of examining breasts/testicles for lumps. I think they’re fine, since they have an important message that checking yourself for cancer isn’t dirty or disgusting.
But making an anti-cancer campaign about maximising your sexual attractiveness… just no.

Telling a segment of the population, male and female, the ones who are going to respond to this sort of advertising that you don’t want their money is jim dandy and all, but if that money helped research treatment or ideally a cure then would future cancer sufferers really thank you for taking a stand on their behalf?

Also, this may be the most effective way of parting that particular segment of the population (I reckon they’re probably known as “the majority” but I have little faith in humanity) and if you can’t have their hearts and minds, you may as well have their wallets. 

http://jezebel.com/5936655/headless-breasts-star-in-charming-axe-commercial
Axe has yet another sexist commercial, this time featuring headless women! (Jezebel is currently offline due to Hurricane Sandy but I encourage you to read it when it is back up.)

But, you know, I guess if you’re doing an advertisement for BREAST CANCER awareness, then doing a campaign similar to sexist Axe commercials is totally the way to go!

Here’s yet another fragrance company using headless women on their advertising:

http://www.thejanedough.com/alibi-fragrance-ad/

Wait.  You mean to tell me this is a complicated subject that perhaps you really know nothing about?  Huh.