Aideen said:

EWWWWWWWW!

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 8:52 AM

Ruth Moss said:

OMG, is that for real?

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 9:03 AM

eleanargh said:

That's not just kind of creepy, that's disgusting. Euch.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 10:05 AM

thinendofthewedge said:

I see a strong similarity between this and the 'lads mags' angle you covered recently. Once again this upholds heteronormative ideals of female beauty and male (un)worthiness and in my opinion is only likely to help a certain type of man despise and yet covet women even more than they do now.

It makes this feminist man seethe, and wish for the downfall of the advertising industry.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 10:08 AM

Kirsty said:

Ack. That's just all kinds of wrong.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 11:14 AM

JENNIFER DREW said:

This is precisely how women are perceived by men. Women are simultaneously men's sexualised dehumanised objects and also spare body parts. Fitting that a sexualised female body should be used to advertise organ donation because of course women have no need of their bodies, once they have reached their 'sell by date.' Just use a woman's body for organ transplants!

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 11:21 AM

Sabre said:

Clearly women are not potential organ donors, just straight men desperately trying to penetrate a beautiful woman.

Also is there some weird implication here that she's going to be in a horrible car accident or something? And that a man donor is going to save her?

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 11:59 AM

Leigh said:

I want to photo shop this on: 'Your best chance to get 'inside her' is to have a trusting and respectful relationship and be happy that it might or might not lead to sex. Also, like any of, us she'll probably respect you more if you have an organ donor card. But she'll respect you less if you get one just to impress her into sleeping with you.'
Anybody got any better versions?

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 12:20 PM

NotOverreacting said:

OMG, that's really horrible. I'm not sure "creepy" is a strong enough word. Ew.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 1:02 PM

Lynsey said:

I'm not easily offended but that's pretty close. Horrible.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 1:07 PM

Bianca said:

This is just sick. I can't even begin to imagine (do I want to?!) what kind of mentality could dream this one up. Apart from being sick, crass and incredibly sexist, it's also stupid on so many levels. It insults even the men it purports to appeal to, i.e. like they're so thick they can't work out they'd probably have to be dead or at least have their health severely impaired before they could 'get inside her'. Just when you think the ad industry can't come up with something worse...!

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 3:13 PM

Amity said:

That's disturbing.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 3:27 PM

Shea said:

This is just sick. I mean I could sort of understand if it was sperm donation (thats what I first thought) but organ donation? WTF?!

Also of course only beautiful white women are worthy recipients of organs according to this.Sick, sick, sick.

I think I have just mentally replaced banking with advertising as the worst, amoral, money grabbing industry, full of completely reckless, greedy, ignorant little sh*ts. It was a tough decision though.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 4:27 PM

maggie said:

Unfreakinbelievable.

Posted on 14 November 2008 at 4:47 PM

plantinthecorner said:

Get inside her?
Well he could always pick her nose for her...sorry but totally grossed out yet again by misogynistic 13 year old (it would seem) advertisers.

Posted on 15 November 2008 at 12:44 AM

Azure said:

This advert is repugnant on every possible level. Reinforcement of heteronormative standards of beauty and sexuality? Check. Tacitly insulting every possible demographic in society? Check. Reinforcing male sexual entitlement? Double check. Cynically presupposing that people are incapable of an altruistic act? Check ad nauseam.

Ah, the beautiful things that we silly men forget sometimes - that our sole intent in interaction with a woman is to regard her as a convenient orifice (Or orifices if I'm one of those edgy types) for me to insert myself into. Not to mention that I'm obviously also heterosexual.

Beyond that, I also forgot that my only conceivable motive for my doing anything is a sexual one! And if I can't have sex with her, then in the event of my untimely death, saving her life by donating a kidney or a heart or whatever is an adequate substitute which stems from the same motive. Wonderful! Post-humous sexual conquest as a glorious last testament to my boundless, all conquering masculinity! Even in death I could still add notches to my eternal metaphorical bedpost!

Absolutely marvellous. I don't think I've actually seen something that manages to be both so sickeningly misanthropic, misogynistic, misandric and implicitlty racist all at once. The curious thing is that a marketing department somewhere actually sat down and spent considerable time and resources *planning* this thing. That's the bit that I genuinely can't get my head around.

Posted on 15 November 2008 at 11:53 AM

Jess said:

that's REALLY creepy.

::shudder::

Posted on 15 November 2008 at 3:06 PM

Larry Teabag said:

I quite like it. Its starting point is the stereotypical heteronormative sexual relationship (i.e a heterosexual man who desires an unavailable scantily clad temptress), but it completely subverts that to consider instead a very different relationship: that between organ donor and recipient.

...unless anyone here truly believes that it's trying to encourage men to sign up as organ donors for the purpose of sexual gratification, which really would be taking sickness to a whole new level.

Posted on 16 November 2008 at 10:29 PM