To think Poundland ad is not “genius” and is actually a bit I appropriate?

[speakerwoofers]

Most comments on Facebook are proclaiming it “genius.” I don’t think a sexual innuendo is that genius TBF.

Plus why is it a woman lying on her back with a t shirt saying “power” and a man standing over her dominating her. They could have at least chosen another sexual innuendo.

Also difficult to explain to kids.

Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?

I find the toothbrush one unsavoury and not at all funny. I knew someone who cleaned the toilet with her cheating boyfriends toothbrush - he was known to leave skid marks. I just found that 'act of revenge' gross.

Love that last comment Slim

"The love on Facebook has been overwhelming, and that's because it connects with our shoppers. Do you think they did actual research on this or are making an offensive assumption that people with less money find immature, crass and sexist jokes hilarious?

iBiscuit that is an excellent point. It might have come up against more censoriousness if the doll was consensual in her activities!

They have, for example, been careful not to show doll 'breasts' in the hot tub and strip poker posts. Which just goes to show they were actually thinking about what they could 'get away with'

I am waiting for Mattel to distance themselves from this! Do Poundland sell Barbie? Is it an actual Barbie or some sweatshop rip off?

notafish It reminds me of Ratners and the 'crap' comment. That went well, not.

www.theguardian.com/business/2014/aug/22/gerald-ratner-jewellery-total-crap-1992-archive

The love on Facebook for their actual products isn't overwhelming. This is a company who advertise £1 'bog roll' (sic) which one poster called sandpaper. They also are keen to point out that the fake Toblerone tastes like cheap chocolate. And then mainly shopper show follow them on Facebook to ask about opening hours.

If they are attracting people to their Facebook page (which a rise in likes does suggest) those folks will also read the negative comments about the actual products.

"The love on Facebook has been overwhelming, and that's because it connects with our shoppers''

They really do not employ the cleverest of retail minds, do they?!

I'm also someone who has a very dark sense of humour but I didn't like it as it's a bit bleak for a family brand. As someone who's worked for an agency my first thought is usually "How did the meeting go where they presented this idea to the client? And who the hell signed this off?"

Maybe Barbie asked to be teabagged for fucks sake.

Then why is the hash tag #elfbehavingbadly?

What's behaving badly about a consensual sex act?

#stilldon'tgetthejoke

Well, I for one will actively avoid Poundland from now on. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Porndland is in a very competitive business/market sector with Wilko, B&M, etc. It opens up in failing high streets at reduced rates to increase footfall into a declining area. I really can't see this going anywhere positive and I do feel for the employers, especially the women.

Home Bargains is better anyway!

Home Bargains is fantastic, but involves a drive so I rarely go.

I have a weekly shopping precinct jaunt, which involves Poundland, B&M, Iceland, Superdrug and Wilkos. I could probably give Poundland a miss tbh and get everything I need in the other shops. I already flit between them to find the best price on specific things - it's only on a few items that Poundland occasionally has the edge by a few pence.

I'm not poor btw, just tight careful with my money.

I was merely saying that retail jobs are just as good despite what other posters may say.

Having worked in retail I can categorically say that retail jobs are not in anyway like you have described. Shit pay, shit job that most people do because they need the money, not because they aspire to be stacking shelves in Poundland for a living.

Still no reply on why racism isn't ok but sexism is. Apart from the usual 'it's just bantz' type replies. Interesting.

What are they actually trying to sell? The elf doll or the teabags?

I see one of the people who thinks this is fantastic and funny and what's wrong with it also posted this - in response to talk around #metoo:

"pumpkin can you really not see how this image comes across? And that’s ok with you? So why choose Barbie and not another Elf?

As someone who's into social media, that's probably WHY they've done it. They knew they were going to touch a nerve. Bring out the debate.
Have everyone talking."

So this person has claimed that the image has nothing wrong with it but also they say it's been done deliberately to "touch a nerve" (amongst who exactly? women who have been sexually assaulted?) so that shows that at least this person can see very clearly what's wrong with this image but prefers to pretend they can't.

Well... interesting question. Each ad features a product : Oral B (fnarrr) toothpaste , Keratin shampoo , deicer, teabags . But the elf can also be purchased. I assume.

Quite how it even cost £25.33 is beyond me!! That's less than the cost of a professional photographer and less than the cost of a few Barbie dolls so what DID cost £25??? Confused by the figure. misses point but suspects it's made up for effect

FWIW I also read the female doll as unresponsive / unconscious / passed out. Because of the way they have positioned her and hidden her face. If you could see her eyes open and smiling / or she was pushing herself up a bit to meet him then that would remove the (strong) suggestion that she is not joining in.

But, that isn't what they wanted to depict is it, they chose how to position the dolls, with a seemingly unresponsive woman, and an elf who is looking smirking at "us" - he has an audience.

I am actually wondering whether they are avoiding showing the face to do with legal reasons so they do not appear to be advertising the Barbie : I am sure they realised the company wouldn't be happy, for a whole host of reasons. They didn't think through Twinings' response though!

Whatever their reason for showing the face, it does mean that it's left to the viewer to decide whether she is happy / awake or not.

The way she's just lying there with her hands by her sides means that the reading of her as incapacitated in some way is (in my opinion) more likely than she's really enjoying it, because if she was really enjoying it I don't think she'd just be lying there like that. She'd be reaching up, or down , or doing something.

I don't know about any of you but in general if a woman was just lying there like that during a sexual act it's not a good sign. I do read her as out of it.

Of course performing sex acts on unconscious women is something that is hardly uncommon so is it really a stretch to think this is what they are referencing?

Even the person who is pro it has said that they think it's been deliberately done this way because of #metoo.

Also, the doll is wearing a ‘Girl Power’ (ie feminist) t-shirt - I can’t believe that’s an accident. So the logical conclusion is, it’s a dig at feminists.

Why is the doll not an action man wearing a ‘black power’ t-shirt? Or a #nodebate one? At what point does point does it start becoming offensive to those who find it funny now?

I wonder what Mattel have to say about this. Has anyone spotted any responses from them?

Image aside it is genius. The best Ad Campaigns are the ones that are talked about, and remember there is no such thing as 'bad publicity'. Whoever came up with this has singlehandedly wiped the floor with the multi million campaigns from John Lewis, Tesco, Aldi etc Everyone is talking about it, everyone has an opinion of it good or bad. It's a £25 ad campaign that has the whole country watching. Now that is genius.

There really is such a thing as bad publicity. Someone mentioned Ratners upthread; I mentioned Pepsi. These days that is regarded as very bad marketing advice.

Twinings withdrawing their product from the image is also a bit of a backfire, wouldn't you say?

It is only genius if their sales figures reflect its genius.