Supposedly Unintentional Implications Can Still Be Offensive

Ageist

The term “geezer” is obviously and unquestionably derogatory, at least on this side of the Atlantic. This image was part of an ad campaign by a convenience store for a drink by the same insensitive name. Complaints have been made for multiple reasons, the most prominent being that it's disrespectful and that it makes no sense. Being lined up like cups in the dispensers at a gas station is demeaning to anybody, but combining that with such a derisive word isn't humorous for many people.

Racist

The image of Indians--Ostentatious, goofy, greasy and vaguely sleazy--presented in this advertisement for Popchips is bad enough. The fact that it's a Caucasian actor—namely, Ashton Kutcher, who has lost a great deal of my respect due to this ad—in “brown-face” makeup makes it worse. Popchips as a brand take great pains to maintain an all-natural, healthy image and attempt to present themselves as a more ethical snack relative to “mainstream” eats. It would be an understatement to say this particular ad undermines that image.

Heterosexist

On first glance, this appalling travesty appears to be an officially sanctioned Nike ad. Apparently it was a submission as part of a student ad contest for CMYK magazine. After the ad was released on the web, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) among others were profoundly outraged. The publisher of CMYK, Curtis Clarkson, produced a series of backpedaling excuses including that the student ads often feature “risque, biting humor” and that he just went by the word of the contest judge. The stereotype of male ballet dancers as flamboyant homosexuals is as pervasive as it is inaccurate. To be a ballet dancer requires just as much strength and stamina as most “macho” team sports. My fiance's younger sister is an avid and very talented ballerina, and from her accounts many male ballet dancers are heterosexual and even have a reputation for being Lotharios. This ad not only exploits that stereotype but makes the assumption that any properly “macho” father should harbor utter contempt for a centuries-old art form and be completely ashamed of a son who engages in it. I realize ballet isn't for everyone, but the implications of the second half of that sentence are inexcusable.

Sexist

If it weren't for the copyright mark from 2011 and the quality of the photography this Mr. Clean advertisement would be straight out of the 1950s. The woman and her child—who is, of course, a girl—are depicted performing the “Job that really matters” for a mother: cleaning. The degree of sexism is completely outrageous. It would appear the intended implication is that mothering itself is the aforementioned “job” and the excuse has been made on some blogs that it's intended to “glorify mothers” on Mothers Day, but the intention is not always the result. Someone in the Mr. Clean marketing department made a very stupid decision.

At times it's depressing that, even despite the advanced state of our “civilized” first-world society, such advertisements are still created and published.

For this week's editing mistake I've chosen a flyer from a pin-up photographer in southern Utah. Many women find pursuing that pin-up aesthetic empowering, but I don't think "high red edits" appeal to anyone.