Green Day's ¡Uno! advertising in Japan [awesome]

[J&TheNight]

So are these women supposed to walk around in short skirts and show people? Because if so, that would never work, people would just assume she's an obsessive Green Day fan with a silly temp tattoo.

It looks good in a picture which could then be plastered somewhere as ACTUAL advertising, but if you just sat next to such a girl on a bus, you wouldn't exactly think about it as an ad.

I have to disagree, if it gets the album out there in any way it's useful. Sure a billboard might work on a broader and more typical sense, but if I was someone who didn't know about Uno and saw that on some hot chicks leg I would definitely be curious as to what it was.

It's not a television program, but it definitely fulfills it's purpose. Plus it's probably not that expensive to do at all, and it must catch a lot of looks.

[Awesompawsome]

Green Day objectifying women? Not awesome, actually.

Said no one Ever

[J&TheNight]

Green Day objectifying women? Not awesome, actually.

Well it is a job these girls have taken of their own accord and are being paid for ^o^ Plus it shows like what, 3-4 inches of their leg beneath the skirt? It'd be different if they had to roam the streets topless, but this is really harmless. I've seen girls wear much less for no reason at all. In public! In Walmart..... e.e

[pasalaska]

Green Day objectifying women? Not awesome, actually.

Whether this is objectification or not aside, I hardly think the band even knows about this, and if they did I doubt they'd really get a say in it. The label is all about selling and profit, in the end.

[tvrman]

It is a Japanese PR company, advertising in Japan, in a way that is probably considered the 'in' way at the moment, in Japan. All that matters is what is accepted.. in Japan. Anyone who takes any form of offense, or is getting their knickers in a twist clearly does not understand Japanese youth culture or even the latest fashions in Japan.

[Tommy's Tonsils]

Said no one Ever

lololol you think you're so funny lolololololol sexism still exists lololololol this marketing campaign is really fucking dumb lolololol

Whether this is objectification or not aside, I hardly think the band even knows about this, and if they did I doubt they'd really get a say in it. The label is all about selling and profit, in the end.

Oh yeah, definitely, I'm sure the band doesn't have any part in any of their advertising. They're probably pretty uninterested in that aspect of their careers.

Well it is a job these girls have taken of their own accord and are being paid for ^o^ Plus it shows like what, 3-4 inches of their leg beneath the skirt? It'd be different if they had to roam the streets topless, but this is really harmless. I've seen girls wear much less for no reason at all. In public! In Walmart..... e.e

Well, but it's pretty much ASKING these girls to wear clothing that shows parts of their bodies that maybe they wouldn't otherwise show. These women are willing to get paid to have people look at their upper thighs while they wear really short skirts, and while that's their choice, that doesn't change the fact that it's promoting being objectified. They don't really have agency in this situation, they're young girls who like a band a lot and need money so they're willing to show some skin for it. Sure, they're not topless, but it's still the same principle.

It is a Japanese PR company, advertising in Japan, in a way that is probably considered the 'in' way at the moment, in Japan. All that matters is what is accepted.. in Japan. Anyone who takes any form of offense, or is getting their knickers in a twist clearly does not understand Japanese youth culture or even the latest fashions in Japan.

This is definitely something that makes sense in Japan. I get that. Doesn't make it any less objectifying.

Like, seriously, y'all. That's what this is. You can still like this marketing campaign or defend it or whatever, but it's a form of objectification.

[pasalaska]

Well, but it's pretty much ASKING these girls to wear clothing that shows parts of their bodies that maybe they wouldn't otherwise show. These women are willing to get paid to have people look at their upper thighs while they wear really short skirts, and while that's their choice, that doesn't change the fact that it's promoting being objectified. They don't really have agency in this situation, they're young girls who like a band a lot and need money so they're willing to show some skin for it. Sure, they're not topless, but it's still the same principle.

I get the point you're trying to make, but this is pretty standard clothing and fashion for Japan and has been for years. It's more of a case that someone at some advertising agency somewhere took an already-existing image and stamped advertising on it, rather than forcing women to wear short skirts.

You could even think of it as women exploiting men, using a piece of their body that they were born with, that they would have exposed anyway, but making money off it because there are always going to be men that will look at a nice pair of legs. As long as it's 100% voluntary why not make money off it? Just because it's women using their bodies, it doesn't make it objectification.

I doubt that they do this because they're fans of the band, either, I think they just get whatever the ad company gets assigned to sell.

[nezda86]

I don´t know, first thought that hit me was Japanese porn, that´s almost all about student girls with short skirts, tie and all that uniform. I would prefer that to be no way connected with GD. I think the right way is the right music, if it´s good enough, it sells easily. That´s how I was involved in liking GD. Advertising that ain´t about music would be no help. I speak for myself, though.

[nezda86]

Group of people visibly marked with GD stuff (T-shirts, belts...) doing some beneficial things, like I don´t know cleaning city that´s I think an awesome advertisement.

[Tommy's Tonsils]

I get the point you're trying to make, but this is pretty standard clothing and fashion for Japan and has been for years. It's more of a case that someone at some advertising agency somewhere took an already-existing image and stamped advertising on it, rather than forcing women to wear short skirts.

You could even think of it as women exploiting men, using a piece of their body that they were born with, that they would have exposed anyway, but making money off it because there are always going to be men that will look at a nice pair of legs. As long as it's 100% voluntary why not make money off it? Just because it's women using their bodies, it doesn't make it objectification.

I doubt that they do this because they're fans of the band, either, I think they just get whatever the ad company gets assigned to sell.

I guess, to clarify, I'm aware that this is a popular fashion in Japan. There are some objectifying and sexist facets of Japan's fashion and pop culture. It's also totally ok for girls to wear skirts and high socks if they want to. That's not really the issue here.

There's a really interesting Ted Talk that talks about sexual objectification, and the speaker shows this list as one way to tell if an advertisement or image is sexually objectifying:

1. Does the image show only parts of a sexualized person's body?

2. Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?

3. Does the image show a sexualized person as interchangeable?

4. Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person that can't consent?

5. Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?

6. Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity (something that can be bought and sold)?

7. Does the image treat a sexualized person's body as a canvas?

While this isn't a definitive list, I think it's pretty valuable when assessing instances like this because it's really hard for people to tell when they're looking at a sexually objectifying image. We're surrounded by things like this every day to the point that we've just accepted it as normal and can't always identify it. In this particular case, this form of advertising seems to fulfill 3 and 7 above. Like, to use your thighs, a sexualized body part, as a canvas on which to place this advertisement is objectifying. And all of these girls are interchangeable; they aren't considered individual people, they're all the same in that they're all cute girls in the same clothing all satisfying the same message in the same way. They aren't acting, they are being acted upon; they aren't able to use any of their agency because the purpose of this kind of advertising is to force people to look AT them while they just stand there and allow the gaze of others to hit them.

I'm not like, a prude, I'm not easily offended, and I don't really care about this particular case. But this kind of subtle sexism and sexual objectification is part of a really big problem with societies around the world, and to talk about it as something that's awesome is part of the problem.

[JIGD13]

I guess, to clarify, I'm aware that this is a popular fashion in Japan. There are some objectifying and sexist facets of Japan's fashion and pop culture. It's also totally ok for girls to wear skirts and high socks if they want to. That's not really the issue here.

There's a really interesting Ted Talk that talks about sexual objectification, and the speaker shows this list as one way to tell if an advertisement or image is sexually objectifying:

1. Does the image show only parts of a sexualized person's body?

2. Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?

3. Does the image show a sexualized person as interchangeable?

4. Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person that can't consent?

5. Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?

6. Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity (something that can be bought and sold)?

7. Does the image treat a sexualized person's body as a canvas?

While this isn't a definitive list, I think it's pretty valuable when assessing instances like this because it's really hard for people to tell when they're looking at a sexually objectifying image. We're surrounded by things like this every day to the point that we've just accepted it as normal and can't always identify it. In this particular case, this form of advertising seems to fulfill 3 and 7 above. Like, to use your thighs, a sexualized body part, as a canvas on which to place this advertisement is objectifying. And all of these girls are interchangeable; they aren't considered individual people, they're all the same in that they're all cute girls in the same clothing all satisfying the same message in the same way. They aren't acting, they are being acted upon; they aren't able to use any of their agency because the purpose of this kind of advertising is to force people to look AT them while they just stand there and allow the gaze of others to hit them.

I'm not like, a prude, I'm not easily offended, and I don't really care about this particular case. But this kind of subtle sexism and sexual objectification is part of a really big problem with societies around the world, and to talk about it as something that's awesome is part of the problem.

I'm too lazy to read it

[andrearosef]

Pretty odd, and I can see how it's misogynistic too. After the Oh Love music video it's not surprising though. HA HA!!! Just kidding guys. I don't know. I don't care too much this is weird and Japan is usually weird. But yeah. Just pretty odd.

[Hermione]

I'm too lazy to read it

If you're too lazy to read it don't spam the thread by replying to it with a useless comment please.

[Awesompawsome]

lololol you think you're so funny lolololololol sexism still exists lololololol this marketing campaign is really fucking dumb lolololol

Oh yeah, definitely, I'm sure the band doesn't have any part in any of their advertising. They're probably pretty uninterested in that aspect of their careers.

Well, but it's pretty much ASKING these girls to wear clothing that shows parts of their bodies that maybe they wouldn't otherwise show. These women are willing to get paid to have people look at their upper thighs while they wear really short skirts, and while that's their choice, that doesn't change the fact that it's promoting being objectified. They don't really have agency in this situation, they're young girls who like a band a lot and need money so they're willing to show some skin for it. Sure, they're not topless, but it's still the same principle.

This is definitely something that makes sense in Japan. I get that. Doesn't make it any less objectifying.

Like, seriously, y'all. That's what this is. You can still like this marketing campaign or defend it or whatever, but it's a form of objectification.

Women objectify men, grow the fuck up you don't deserve any extra treatment than any other goddamn thing on this fucking earth you fucking attention whore

[Hermione]

Women objectify men, grow the fuck up you don't deserve any extra treatment than any other goddamn thing on this fucking earth you fucking attention whore

Excuse me, we don't speak to each other like that here. If you disagree then explain why in a civilized manner, don't be rude and abusive. If you speak to another member like that again you'll be warned.

[Tommy's Tonsils]

Women objectify men, grow the fuck up you don't deserve any extra treatment than any other goddamn thing on this fucking earth you fucking attention whore

I think you might be the ignorant 13 year old seeking attention I truly hope you learn how to be a reasonable person before you get older.

[nezda86]

I guess, to clarify, I'm aware that this is a popular fashion in Japan. There are some objectifying and sexist facets of Japan's fashion and pop culture. It's also totally ok for girls to wear skirts and high socks if they want to. That's not really the issue here.

There's a really interesting Ted Talk that talks about sexual objectification, and the speaker shows this list as one way to tell if an advertisement or image is sexually objectifying:

1. Does the image show only parts of a sexualized person's body?

2. Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?

3. Does the image show a sexualized person as interchangeable?

4. Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person that can't consent?

5. Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?

6. Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity (something that can be bought and sold)?

7. Does the image treat a sexualized person's body as a canvas?

While this isn't a definitive list, I think it's pretty valuable when assessing instances like this because it's really hard for people to tell when they're looking at a sexually objectifying image. We're surrounded by things like this every day to the point that we've just accepted it as normal and can't always identify it. In this particular case, this form of advertising seems to fulfill 3 and 7 above. Like, to use your thighs, a sexualized body part, as a canvas on which to place this advertisement is objectifying. And all of these girls are interchangeable; they aren't considered individual people, they're all the same in that they're all cute girls in the same clothing all satisfying the same message in the same way. They aren't acting, they are being acted upon; they aren't able to use any of their agency because the purpose of this kind of advertising is to force people to look AT them while they just stand there and allow the gaze of others to hit them.

I'm not like, a prude, I'm not easily offended, and I don't really care about this particular case. But this kind of subtle sexism and sexual objectification is part of a really big problem with societies around the world, and to talk about it as something that's awesome is part of the problem.

I just don´t see a big effect of this, I think and it was already said here, the only people who would be anyhow hit by the image would be GD fans. I mean what´s the big deal of it. I certainly wouldn´t buy a cd or go to the concert because some girls present the image on their bodies. In a way it´s a bit pathetic. Maybe I don´t understand current industry or maybe I just don´t want to.

[nezda86]

Question is, if I listen to the music after seeing the image. I 90% wouldn´t. I just ignore these types of advertisements for the purpose they´re meant to.

[Tommy's Tonsils]

I just don´t see a big effect of this, I think and it was already said here, the only people who would be anyhow hit by the image would be GD fans. I mean what´s the big deal of it. I certainly wouldn´t buy a cd or go to the concert because some girls present the image on their bodies. In a way it´s a bit pathetic. Maybe I don´t understand current industry or maybe I just don´t want to.

Well, considering that gender issues among men and women are rampant throughout the world, I'd say that all of the tiny little aspects of it that keep adding up are all a big deal because they're part of a bigger problem. It's not about who sees the advertising, it's about how the advertising is done, who is doing it, and how it expects to take advantage of people.

[J&TheNight]

You being offended by this confuses the hell out of me, I mean it.
To those of you saying all of this "it just makes me think of Japanese porn LOL japan is weird and this is weird LOL", it really shows how little you of Japan and it's culture. For one, this is NOT weird. It's a temporary tattoo on some girls leg about 4 inches down on the only part of her skin thats really exposed. I've ads from Germany, UK, and the US far FAR worse than that! This is just clever as hell advertising that is clearly working well because it was mentioned on several sites and youtube news accounts already.
Japan does have some wierd pop culture going on though, it's impossible to deny. But that's just their pop culture, something that evolves and changes every year. Once you get past the outer edge of the culture you realise how much more there is.

To please everyone maybe next time they can put the ad on the hand of a genderless life size doll and wheel it around town with womens rights brochures and magazines that preach to men that it's okay to be fat and unhealthy, dont buy into the corporate lie that all men must be fit in order to live a healthy and more pleasureable life.

I'm sorry, but I think people look to hard these days for something to complain about, especially in America where the only time I see a women/men complain about equal rights is when they get the short end of the stick for once instead of being on top.

[Tommy's Tonsils]

You being offended by this confuses the hell out of me, I mean it.

To those of you saying all of this "it just makes me think of Japanese porn LOL japan is weird and this is weird LOL", it really shows how little you of Japan and it's culture. For one, this is NOT weird. It's a temporary tattoo on some girls leg about 4 inches down on the only part of her skin thats really exposed. I've ads from Germany, UK, and the US far FAR worse than that! This is just clever as hell advertising that is clearly working well because it was mentioned on several sites and youtube news accounts already.

Japan does have some wierd pop culture going on though, it's impossible to deny. But that's just their pop culture, something that evolves and changes every year. Once you get past the outer edge of the culture you realise how much more there is.

To please everyone maybe next time they can put the ad on the hand of a genderless life size doll and wheel it around town with womens rights brochures and magazines that preach to men that it's okay to be fat and unhealthy, dont buy into the corporate lie that all men must be fit in order to live a healthy and more pleasureable life.

I'm sorry, but I think people look to hard these days for something to complain about, especially in America where the only time I see a women/men complain about equal rights is when they get the short end of the stick for once instead of being on top.

It's not about measuring how much worse certain ads are compared to others, though. An ad that takes advantage of a person's or group of people's sexuality is objectifying. You only seeing women or men complain in America when they're not on top is YOUR experience, not everyone's experience. There is gender inequality in America, and just because it's not clear to you doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's actually quite bad. Of course, there are other countries where it's worse, but it's not about comparing, y'know?

I feel like a broken record saying this over and over again. I'm not being a prude, I'm not trying to be rude, but this ad campaign IS objectifying. Whether or not it offends you personally is your own business or whatever. That doesn't change the fact that it fits the mold of what sexually objectifying advertising is by definition. I don't want to like, argue about it. I'm just trying to make a valid point and everyone keeps acting like I'm just being an offensive attention seeker. I'm just really disappointed when I see how often Green Day fans on this forum are uneducated regarding social issues of today.

[NaughtyHellGod]

To keep the ladies happy, They can use my hairy legs to advertise,I know the ladies really like it.

[nezda86]

Well, considering that gender issues among men and women are rampant throughout the world, I'd say that all of the tiny little aspects of it that keep adding up are all a big deal because they're part of a bigger problem. It's not about who sees the advertising, it's about how the advertising is done, who is doing it, and how it expects to take advantage of people.

I hope it is and will be only issue of Japanese culture (a bit perverted? ). I am quite disappointed but let´s admit, the end justifies the means, unfortunately.

I am so negative about it because I don´t see the aspects I appreciate in advertising - wit and originality. This is jus a weak attempt to attract attention of whom really? Horny guys that slobber whenever they see an attractive girl? This should be the target group? I hope not....

To keep the ladies happy, They can use my hairy legs to advertise,I know the ladies really like it.

I definitely doubt it

[HolyHandGrenade]

I hope it is and will be only issue of Japanese culture (a bit perverted? ). I am quite disappointed but let´s admit, the end justifies the means, unfortunately.

I am so negative about it because I don´t see the aspects I appreciate in advertising - wit and originality. This is jus a weak attempt to attract attention of whom really? Horny guys that slobber whenever they see an attractive girl? This should be the target group? I hope not....

Even if the end justifies the means, the end can wind up being misconstrued because of the means. The end is what defines success, but the means is what defines who you are - your character, how people view you, and what destination you will end up in for the future.

[nezda86]

You being offended by this confuses the hell out of me, I mean it.

To those of you saying all of this "it just makes me think of Japanese porn LOL japan is weird and this is weird LOL", it really shows how little you of Japan and it's culture. For one, this is NOT weird. It's a temporary tattoo on some girls leg about 4 inches down on the only part of her skin thats really exposed. I've ads from Germany, UK, and the US far FAR worse than that! This is just clever as hell advertising that is clearly working well because it was mentioned on several sites and youtube news accounts already.

Japan does have some wierd pop culture going on though, it's impossible to deny. But that's just their pop culture, something that evolves and changes every year. Once you get past the outer edge of the culture you realise how much more there is.

To please everyone maybe next time they can put the ad on the hand of a genderless life size doll and wheel it around town with womens rights brochures and magazines that preach to men that it's okay to be fat and unhealthy, dont buy into the corporate lie that all men must be fit in order to live a healthy and more pleasureable life.

I'm sorry, but I think people look to hard these days for something to complain about, especially in America where the only time I see a women/men complain about equal rights is when they get the short end of the stick for once instead of being on top.

I am no prude, I am no feminist, I don´t live in America and still I don´t approve of this idea because it´s simply not good enough for me. I think I have at least the right to say the first association, that I still think was not a bit off, it smells of porn. I´m not going to repeat what I have already posted.

Yeah, I don´t know much about Japan, I don´t know much about Czech Republic either, I only posted what I felt and still feel.