Skip to main content

is this the worst advertisement ever in the history of mankind?

ok, sadly, it probably isn't, but it's still pretty disturbing.

i was flipping through the march issue of in style and i came across this ad. it looks innocuous enough at first, even kind of adorable.


if you're having trouble- or are trying to avoid looking too closely- the text reads:

an intimate moment captured in two distinctive fragrances for her. designed by ashley olsen and mary kate olsen.

look, i'm aware that "intimate" doesn't always mean something sexual, but throwing a naked chick who looks like she's been knocked unconscious from a four hour fuck fest does tend to lead you in that direction. and then that idea barrels like a runaway train into the image of an equally exhausted and happy-looking puppy passed out just south of the lady's nasty bits.

what the hell am i looking at here? because it kind of looks like the aftermath of a human-pet cuddle session that crossed a line somewhere.

furthermore, why is looking at this supposed to make me want to experience the smells that go along with the moment? it's one thing to say that you like the smell of your bed when you put on freshly laundered sheets, but that's not the vibe i'm getting from this. i'm guessing those sheets smell a lot like co-mingled sweat and wrong.

i like my perfumes a little on the edgy side. in fact, i wear men's scents fairly often, because i find that they work better against my skin than a lot of women's ones. so i'm not usually one to judge people for liking perfumes that are a little off the beaten path, but there does still seems [to me] to be a massive difference between the smoky, leathery darkness of tom ford's "tuscan leather" [a personal favourite, by the way] and an afternoon of hot dog sex as a signature scent.

perhaps this means i'm no longer hip to what the kids are doing these days. looking at this monstrosity, i'd like to say i'm ok with that. i'm seriously so incredibly ok with that

Comments

Bellyhead said…
XD ACK! I spit out my coffee this morning while reading this.

This whole ad evoke just WRONG. WRONG WRONG WRONG.

It's not even slightly crossed the border sexy wrong. NEWP.

JUST WRONG.
Kate MacDonald said…
It's actually a great relief to me that I'm not the only person who can see the WRONG.
Lani said…
What the? What were they thinking?! Definitely creepy.

as long as you're here, why not read more?

fun-raising

no, i am not dead, nor have i been lying incapacitated in a ditch somewhere. i've mostly been preparing for our imminent, epic move, which is actually not so terribly epic, because we found a place quite close to where we are now. in addition, i've been the beneficiary of an inordinately large amount of paying work, which does, sadly, take precedence over blogging, even though you know i'd always rather be with you.

indeed, with moving expenses and medical expenses looming on the horizon, more than can be accounted for even with the deepest cuts in the lipstick budget, dom and i recently did something that we've not done before: we asked for help. last week, we launched a fundraising campaign on go fund me. it can be difficult to admit that you need a helping hand, but what's been overwhelming for both of us is how quick to respond so many people we know have been once we asked. it's also shocking to see how quickly things added up.

most of all, though, the ex…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …