Sexuality and Meat, part 1
PETA is making waves (hard to imagine, I know) with a superbowl ad that’s supposedly ‘too sexual’ to be aired on tv. This is as good a time as any to start the sex and food discussion. So, in this first installment, take a look at both these ads below and ask yourself why there might be different reactions to the two of them. I think they’re both ridiculous but that’s not the point. It’s about the story behind the story.
What’s the difference between these two videos? It’s easier to see the imagery if you turn the sound off.
1) add for hamburgers (don’t miss the fact that she’s wearing some kind of fur that she drops in the beginning, white fur no less …)
2) add for vegetarianism
Most of the usual feedback I hear when PETA does stuff like this is that it somehow reflects poorly on the concept of animal rights and vegetarianism – not just the women who participate in the add.
Why is the first video not generally accused of reflecting poorly on the concept of meat eating?
What do you notice about the settings the women are in, what additional meaning does the scene selection convey?
Would you say the target audience is the same for both? Why or why not?
