Audi drops not to subtle paedophile car advert!

[Knoxinbox]

There is no way this was just badly thought through....

I think this comment sums it up

“Let's add it up: Red=eroticism, sports car=substitute for potency, animal print mini-skirt=sex appeal, banana=phallic symbol. But sure this is all just accidental...”

Do you think this was someone testing the waters so to speak about how society might respond to something like this? I’ve read quite a few things on here about how the MRA has as its core aim to normalise paedophilia as just another sexual preference (eg minor attracted person) and this was what immediately jumped to my mind with this ad.

What do you think??

Because if it’s just the image - you’re reaching so hard. Honestly you’re doing a disservice to actual victims of paedophiles by claiming
anything and everything is a sexualisation of children

I like your naivety, so here's my thoughts and I'm an actual victim of CSA and grooming gangs.
You've evidently never been on reddit where the most disgusting and disturbing ideas get posted.

When children are involved, literally anything could be sexualisation. Even adverts for nappies have been changed over the years, because MAPs got all hot and bothered by them.
If you think about adult sexuality and the many ways adults get their kicks, why can you not see that MAPs also will get kicks the same way. Do you think it's the child part that motivates them? No they have paraphileas and kinks just involving children instead of adults.

So as a long term survivor, this advert raises all the hackles on the back of my neck. And its definitely trying to normalise pedophilia. Something we should all be aware of or one day it will happen, and its girls as ever that will lose out.

For all the "there is no higher power" and "pedophiles aren't trying to normalise sexualisation and children",

I present to you the Hasbro Poppy Troll Doll, which -despite mentioning nothing about this on the box - has an extra button where the genitals would be which makes her giggle and gasp.

twitter.com/SamParkerSenate/status/1290986237315039232?s=19

Oh, and her dress is the colours of the Minor-Attracted Persons community flag.

Nothing to see here either, move along everyone.

I think there are reasons why it caused people to think that.

a) It's not unusual for products, men's products too, to be sold by selling women + sex
b) The motor industry has a history of using model showgirls, eyecandy, at events. The most famous is Formula 1.

Given that information, people saw this advert and saw that the child is
d) female
e)at penis level
f) holding a banana next to her face at that level

@TehBewilderness You've reminded me of something. Go on Youtube and search ASMR banana. Jesus Christ.........I've done it now and it's worse than I thought.

They're all young women dressed up, and a lot of them doing it with yogurt, and there's obviously huge focus on the mouth, seductive gazes and boobs usually. Just seen one with a banana AND cucumber lol.

This is why people think ASMR is a fetish or something sexual, when for most people it isn't and was never meant to be - ASMR is sophomoric and relaxing, not arousing! A few years ago (about 5-7 years I'd say), women from Easter Europe started popping up with ASMR channels with content that was clearly sexual. Those videos are a cover for the sex industry. I'm sure it's tame compared to what some kids have seen these days though :(

For those who have never made the connection between banana and fellatio and are blaming their youth/our age, in the 90s/2000s and episode of Will and Grace featured her wanting a child and them sitting wondering what to do.... He (gay) is eating a ring doughnut, she (straight) is eating a banana. They are fingering them in a suggestive, obvious way . No one can claim this is innocent and they are 'just eating'.

That's not even an old one - it was an ages-old way of suggesting sex even then, and has not gone away. Putting it in the context of a small girl is IN NO WAY accidental. No way is it a brain-fart in the dozens of people involved in the conception, execution and release of this advert.
As with that fucking awful Troll Doll. Enough people will be faux-innocent, ok-it's-ok look at the lovely colours, to normalise all this sexualising of children.

When children are involved, literally anything could be sexualisation. Even adverts for nappies have been changed over the years, because MAPs got all hot and bothered by them.

I don’t understand this though.
Surely an advert showing a baby eating porridge or a young child playing football could be seen as ‘attractive’ by a peado.
So should we just not have children on tv?

I 100% agree that they will be more attracted to a nappy advert than when they are fully clothed but with the internet all you have to do is type it in any image you want comes up so why would they only care so much about adverts.
When my DD was little if she got a rash or something I would google image the symptoms and thousands of images would come up.

What. The. Fuck

That Poppy doll is so disturbing. Bad enough it has a crotch button but why does she giggle and gasp?!

How did no one in the production team pick that up?!

I seriously doubt that there is any ignorance behind the image.

These people have had decades of advertising experience, refinement, power, effectiveness.

Including subliminal advertising and product placement. Not consciously registering a Coke can in the background of a fight scene will still make you go and get one from the fridge.

It's laughable that advertising executives wouldn't know the connotations of a banana that is promoting anything at all, other than actual bananas.

And that's all I need to know really. On that premise, the rest speaks for itself.

This advert is being released at the same time as the production of a children's doll which, when you put a finger on its genitals, gasps and giggles.

If that's not the blatant normalisation of paedophilia, and a paedophile's dream come true, then I don't know what is. How far people expect it to actually go, before it's flagged.

*do people expect it

I just didnt understand it. Like there is so much thought into these adverts. Who sits around a room and thinks of that? Maybe if it wasnt for the banana. The cute little girl being sassy with a cool car (something about how it makes you feel like something you're not, I dont know) but the banana? Also upsets me to think of a parent letting their kid do that. Unless the banana was photoshopped in.

Again - what was the reasoning for that doll?

Those who dont get the banana- I was a pretty sheltered kid but I still wouldn't eat bananas in front of boys because of the sexual undertones. I have a few friends who still cringe when they see them.

When you create something, the first thing you would do is look up all associations with bananas. It comes up very quickly.

If you see nothing, ask any man you know. See what they say.

@Sunrise234 yes. An apple or chocolate would be very different. A banana or hot dog so creepy. Anyone would know that!

The slogan even creepier.

@Lelophants

Again - what was the reasoning for that doll?

Apparently it's meant to make those noises when it sits down. God knows why. People don't tend to gasp or giggle when they sit down. It was just their waffly lame get out, that makes it worse, in my opinion. The doll talks, like a normal doll if you press its stomach. Unlike the crotch button, which apparently, was not advertised anywhere on the packaging.

Honestly this stuff depresses me so much! Another reason women never to be heading up companies. It's all from the top.

Sunrise234

Ok so you dont get it, fine. But a lot of people do get it.
They are all saying the same thing. Are we all wrong or in fact are you naive? Being unaware is not itself a bad thing, but surely to God when children at least are involved you would look more into it and see we are right or accept we know more. Flaunting the fact you cannot see the bad in this advert is not a great look.

@Sunrise234
I envy your naivety.

I implore you to ask any male over the age of 12 what he thinks. I rest my case.

I didnt realise for years the monkey racism reference. Of course I didnt think of it that way as I'm not horribly racist. However it's important to know these connotations so you can fight against it. Ignorance isnt always bliss.

Try sitting in an office full of men and eat a banana. I’ll bet my months salary that they start nudging each other immediately and look at each other with stupid grins. Ask a teenage boy what he thinks. Of course bananas have sexual connotations. It’s not right but they do. Same as a Cadbury’s flake.

I think I heard a 'banana' 'joke' first when I was about 14.
Different continent, different culture, more years ago than I like to say... Of course it's a thing. People claiming not to know are excessively naive at best, lying at worst.

All these men (and a few women) at Audi will have known what they were doing. That's the most depressing thing.

Likewise the guys (and couple a gals) at the Troll doll place - Hasbro.

It does not look sexual to me

But the image makes me feel uncomfortable (big car, small kid, what if the driver does not see her there)

Then on second thought: why the banana?

I rarely eaten a banana in public since I was 13 (35 years ago) due to male comments and sniggering

If I eat one now, at a sports match, I always break a piece off and eat it like that.

I can’t be the only woman who does this

The banana is wholly unnecessary to the advert and has zero to with a car. It’s not a clever pun somehow tied in via the (questionable and also crap) strapline. It’s well-known as a visual prop to denote a phallus/fellatio.

I don’t see it and immediately think of sex, but undoubtedly the banana makes it sexual - for all the reasons pp state & not least the reaction “banana-eating” gets in real life(!) we all know it’s true. So to those who have a sick predilection or from an academic perspective, whilst not outright “sexy”, the banana makes this is a sexually charged image.

To those shrugging and saying they can’t see anything wrong, it’s not you (presumably) whose heart would be “beating faster - in every respect” re sexualised images of children but to assume that because this doesn’t apply to you & therefore there’s no problem, is woefully naive at best and displays a lack of critical thinking skills.

So it’s probably good that the vast majority can pick up on the parts you miss.

Ok so you dont get it, fine. But a lot of people do get it.
They are all saying the same thing. Are we all wrong or in fact are you naive?

But they’re not all saying the same thing.

Some people think it should be banned because it’s sexually provocative.
But just as many think it should be banned because it’s dangerous that she’s standing in front of the car.
But a huge amount think that neither is an issue. I have asked many male and female friends and none can see any sexual aspect to it.

I will eat bananas, lollies, cucumbers and everything else in front of men because I know I could be sneezing and coughing and they would still find a sexual element to it.
My DD takes bananas in her packed lunch.

If men want to sexualise you or see you as an object he will and what you eat or wear doesn’t change that.
It’s like when men rape women and blame what she was wearing.

Your DD taking bananas in her packed lunch is a world away from your DD or any other child being arranged next to a car with said banana in a pose which has traditionally been an adult female pose next to car for the purpose of using sexual allure to sell cars.

No-one is blaming the child, as that would be absurd. But it is wholly reasonable to question why the child was posed like this by the adults around her.

They just want a lot more people to click on the ad. That’s all this is about really. They know what the image looks like.

I have asked many male and female friends and none can see any sexual aspect to it.

OK