I spontaneously generated this theory. It could amount to nothing, I might be reading a lot more into things than is really there, I don't know. So I'm submitting the theory for peer review and refinement if possible, or complete dismantling if necessary. Here goes.
Sex sells. We know that. I bet it's a phrase every one of us hears five times a week. It's common knowledge. But just how much does it sell? I think it sells a hell of a lot more than anybody really realizes, even the people behind the ads using sex to sell useless crap.
As members of this society we are exposed at very young ages to highly sexual imagery. From the first time we see the TV, read the news, play a game, or buy a doll, we are being trained in the arts of being attractive, learning what to be attracted to, and how to present ourselves sexually -- vaguely if not outright. Bratz dolls, Barbie dolls, GI Joe, almost everything.
Now, before you assume this is just another "leave sex out of my kids' minds" rant (however appropriate that sentiment might be), it isn't. I'm going somewhere off to the side of that whole issue with this.
I think sexual nature of advertising as it is masked and directed at children, is (consciously or not) ultimately designed to activate an "orgasm response" in the target audience. It arouses the libido, and then immediately grabs your attention for its product. This accomplishes much more over the long term, however, than simply selling a product. It cultivates an addiction to immediate gratification, for one.
But maybe more importantly, and especially in the case of advertisements directed at children, it exploits the sex drive prematurely, before a person is able to recognize or control the impulses that have been awakened. It derails the libido, separates it from its natural emotional and instinctual basis, and transforms it into a thirst for material goods and wealth. Presto! New consumer.
But what is left is that, eventually, the act of sex itself is rendered meaningless - emotional fulfillment is now achieved through consumption, so sex is now strictly physical. Furthermore, the emotional act of love is left without a proper release - people fall in love but have no way to express that love in a meaningful manner. Sex is meaningless, and receiving a gift from someone is never quite the same as treating yourself.
There's probably more.
You've hit on something here. Gotta think about this.
I don't think that you're far off.
However I disagree on the point of sex not being properly emotionally fulfilling. It may be the case with some people but not in my experience.
It's tricky for me to gauge the effect on using libido to train the kids to switch to emotional fulfillment through consumption. That may well be the case, but I think that a lot of that stuff is same-gender specific, within a heterosexual context. Simply put, boys aren't going to buy Bratz dolls. Girls are. I think that at that stage of development, if the toys are meant to instill anything in particular into a child, it is expected appearance and lifestyle. A Bratz doll shows an image of what the idyllic teenaged girl is supposed to be and what they are supposed to consume. Libido is attached to it, but obliquely. As far as libido goes it grooms the girls to look like guys are expected to want. I'm sure the reverse is the same for boys, but the Bratz-girl angle is an easy one to hash out.
Edit:
Up to a certain age a thing will be marketed to a boy as, "This is what boys like. Therefore you like it too." Whereas once you hit puberty, breasts do a better job of selling stuff.
Pleasure sells.
If you think of it that way, fast-food, soft drinks, video games, fatness, porn, drug addiction and all sort of things make sense.
IOW: illusions of easy gratification sell.
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on June 26, 2010, 08:11:02 PM
Pleasure sells.
If you think of it that way, fast-food, soft drinks, video games, fatness, porn, drug addiction and all sort of things make sense.
IOW: illusions of easy gratification sell.
Well yes, but I was talking about the side effects of selling things that way.
So, what you are suggesting is that the immense pleasure of various products imprinted by advertising at an early age causes a "premature orgasm" of sorts, and ultimately causes sexual dissatisfaction in later life?
Quote from: Kai on June 27, 2010, 12:55:33 AM
So, what you are suggesting is that the immense pleasure of various products imprinted by advertising at an early age causes a "premature orgasm" of sorts, and ultimately causes sexual dissatisfaction in later life?
Partly that, but not exactly dissatisfaction with sex. The idea is still kinda new in my own head and I'm not expressing it very effectively. But what I'm thinking is maybe this kind of marketing and consumerism finds a way to tap a reservoir of demand that shouldn't naturally exist, by hijacking the libido altogether and turning it into a drive to consume rather than to reproduce.
DOUBLE POST to explain myself.
I realize that may sound a bit old-fashioned, and maybe it is. But I don't mean to imply that the only function of sex ought to be reproduction, so please don't take it that way. Sex is also an expression of love and a powerful bonding behavior for mates.
Maybe the failure rate of marriages and other long term relationships in the West is not entirely due to a "cultural shift away from marriage," or simply the way we see everything as disposable these days. Maybe it is also a result of decades of shifting sexual attention away from each other and onto the consumption of material goods. If we have a pandemic inability for commitment, might it be because we are truly unable to find any emotional gratification in commitment? Not just because we are lazy and selfish, but because we have been socially programmed to reject emotional attachment as satisfying, or even real?
The problem is that deep down it scares us. We have so many walls to put up in front of ourselves that when it's finally time to break them down we chicken out.
Quote from: Zyzyx on June 27, 2010, 09:20:35 AM
The problem is that deep down it scares us. We have so many walls to put up in front of ourselves that when it's finally time to break them down we chicken out.
What scares us?
Quote from: Nigel on June 28, 2010, 01:22:19 AM
Quote from: Zyzyx on June 27, 2010, 09:20:35 AM
The problem is that deep down it scares us. We have so many walls to put up in front of ourselves that when it's finally time to break them down we chicken out.
What scares us?
Zombies with gigantic erections.
Quote from: vexati0n on June 28, 2010, 01:38:39 AM
Quote from: Nigel on June 28, 2010, 01:22:19 AM
Quote from: Zyzyx on June 27, 2010, 09:20:35 AM
The problem is that deep down it scares us. We have so many walls to put up in front of ourselves that when it's finally time to break them down we chicken out.
What scares us?
Zombies with gigantic erections.
I am so tempted to google zombie pron now.
:facepalm:
Quote from: vexati0n on June 27, 2010, 05:09:16 AM
Quote from: Kai on June 27, 2010, 12:55:33 AM
So, what you are suggesting is that the immense pleasure of various products imprinted by advertising at an early age causes a "premature orgasm" of sorts, and ultimately causes sexual dissatisfaction in later life?
Partly that, but not exactly dissatisfaction with sex. The idea is still kinda new in my own head and I'm not expressing it very effectively. But what I'm thinking is maybe this kind of marketing and consumerism finds a way to tap a reservoir of demand that shouldn't naturally exist, by hijacking the libido altogether and turning it into a drive to consume rather than to reproduce.
I think I get what you're getting at. It's like it has become part of the quest for status. It's just another thing you do or own that makes you acheive a certain kind of status in life. You want to have the sex like you want to have the iPhone or to have the certain number of Facebook friends or that particular kind of haircut. Or maybe I'm totally misinterpreting.
Yeah, maybe that's closer to what I'm saying, RWHN. I had this vague idea and I need some help hammering out what it is (if anything) I'm stumbling on here. It could be that sex has been demoted to just another product.
Sex + marketing really is little more than Pavlovian conditioning.
The reason they use hot models in ads is because they want you to associate the product's brand with your preconscious desire for the model.
So it makes me wonder how sex marketing actually affects kids, who presumably don't have a preconscious desire for busty 20-somethings in short skirts. It does probably send the message that this is what the kids should want.
When I grow up, I want to fuck a model too.
/
(http://placesyoudontbringababy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/little-kid-smoking-cigarette-copy21.jpg)
Quote from: vexati0n on June 26, 2010, 07:30:00 AM
But what is left is that, eventually, the act of sex itself is rendered meaningless - emotional fulfillment is now achieved through consumption, so sex is now strictly physical. Furthermore, the emotional act of love is left without a proper release - people fall in love but have no way to express that love in a meaningful manner. Sex is meaningless, and receiving a gift from someone is never quite the same as treating yourself.
There's probably more.
Well broken down. It almost sound like in the end, it isn't sex that's being sold, but maturbation. The appeal, the hook, and the presentaiton is all sex, but the sale and the reciept of goods (outside of the gift recieving case you mentioned) is done by oneself only for oneself. Like the advertising is only saying "this is what you want, go out to get yourself what you want."
Quote from: vexati0n on June 28, 2010, 01:38:39 AM
Quote from: Nigel on June 28, 2010, 01:22:19 AM
Quote from: Zyzyx on June 27, 2010, 09:20:35 AM
The problem is that deep down it scares us. We have so many walls to put up in front of ourselves that when it's finally time to break them down we chicken out.
What scares us?
Zombies with gigantic erections.
:lulz:
Maybe it doesn't need to be pointed out, but it sounds like Pavlovian conditioning to me. The repeated stimuli over time of watching the idiot box eventually alters how you feel about the product by assosciating the stimuli with the product itself until eventually, the original stimuli is no longer essential and you salivate every time you hear a bell... The web is so twisted and intricate, and clouds so many minds with consumer culture filth that the only way out is to swear off television and possibly undergo a traumatic chemical experience... At least, it helped ME a little. I finally saw through the haze because of a few of such experiences, even though I hadn't watched television for years.
All that junk just sort of accumulates over time, all those hotwired and short circuited neurons accumulate white matter and eventually become impossible to repair. It's sad, but that's the way it works, IMO.
Vex, your idea sounds vaguely Reichian. Anyway, we're touching on a lot of interrelated issues here, and it's dfficult to respond to everything at once. I will try.
I don't think the basis of advertising is sexual or orgasmic.
Sexiness has a psychological component, something neither necessary nor sufficient for sex itself.
While advertising has plenty to do with sexiness it has little to do with sex.
I don't think commercials are ruining our orgasms. However, they might create an expectation of constantly being entertained.
So perhaps that is the reason marriage fails. That, and we are taught to believe in, seek out, and expect love, but we do not really know how to love.
Quote from: vexati0n on June 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Maybe the failure rate of marriages and other long term relationships in the West is not entirely due to a "cultural shift away from marriage," or simply the way we see everything as disposable these days. Maybe it is also a result of decades of shifting sexual attention away from each other and onto the consumption of material goods. If we have a pandemic inability for commitment, might it be because we are truly unable to find any emotional gratification in commitment? Not just because we are lazy and selfish, but because we have been socially programmed to reject emotional attachment as satisfying, or even real?
I think up to now this point, above your others, can be developed a lot further. Interesting Stuff. Whether consciously or subconsciously (as you stated) marketing has always toyed and prodded people's sex drive/libidio etc. But to hijack the libido to steer a person towards
becoming a consumer zombie? ... i'm not really buying it.
From what i've traditionally felt/observed advertising gave the potential consumer an
opportunity to become more desirable sexually... a kind of enhancement guaranteed if you purchase X. Such an advertising scheme seems to target normal evolutionary/biological drives.
Pope Lecherous
--batin' since he was a toddler cuz of teh ads