http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archive...e-ad-a-nun.html


" dunno if this is offensive or just goofy. It's a new ad for a women's razor. The plot of the ad is that a Catholic nun in full habit decides that she wants to shorten her skirt enough to show her ankles. It ends with the text: "All women love beautifully smooth legs."

OTOH, it's gentle humor and I'm old enough to remember Sally Fields as "The Flying Nun." (Google that, youngsters...) OTOH, making fun of religious modesty seems unnecessary to sell razor blades. Watch the ad and tell me what you think.

I thought the ad was cute, and found nothing offensive about it...Our nun's in my town wear mid calf skirts, and sometimes white blouses at mass although their head is always covered...They also play a mean guitar

sounds very sweet

Haha, it was adorable. I love cheeky commercials.

Anything to sell a product I guess. Was cute.

yep.. i think so , too!

Definitely cute. I like the old Venus commercials better though.

Not offended.

But then again I'm a teenage male, it takes alot to offend me..

I liked it, after all Nuns are women too LOL..JN

I hope that real nuns shave, cuz if they don't, ewwwwwwww.

I liked how it makes people recognize that nuns are women too. Yes, it's just an ad and the intention is to sell, but it really does make some people think. Around here most nuns wear regular clothing, and if they wear skirts they are calf length. There is an order that wears the traditional habit. They're very young.

OMG

Offensive?...I reckon the nun is smoking hot!

I think it's a cute, harmless commercial too. People who find it offensive need to relax a little in my opinion.

I agree brother

I liked it.. nothing offensive about it at all.. Even God likes his women with smooth legs...

LOL, i would guess. :}

I agree 100% with it being a cute ad.

No big deal.

Most nuns don't wear those habits anymore and they show leg. Thus, one might think that a nun might want to shave her legs...

well, i guess i'm going to have to be the one dissenting voice amongst all these ppl who like this ad.

now whilst i'm no prude... and i dont find the ad objectionable enough to actually complain about it, i do think that it is insulting to the church, the sisters and belittling of the vows taken by sisters in their lifechoice and beliefs.

i also think it's a demonstration of the capacity of the church that this ad can be see as 'acceptable' by so many ppl when material such as this directed at many other religions would not be tolerated in the slightest.

Min

Nun Ankles!

Pavot

Did they take a vow not to show 6" of ankle bone?





What religions?
Islam, perhaps...radical associates of which kill women for showing their faces in public?

...yes, God is great, God is good!

Jesus (sic).

Do you honestly think that nuns...who today, as I said (and which has been the case for many years) wear skirts and stockings, not full habits, don't shave their legs?

One can vow to celibacy and still want to look acceptible, and feel comfortable!
And for God's sake...Lord knows I'm not a woman, but I can imagine the discomfort inherent in wearing stockings with stubble on my legs (which of course is purely natural).

Good Lord!
It's a bloody commercial for a shaving razor for women!!!

Agreed one hundred percent. I would like to meet someone who's offended by this, so I can see what a hypocrite they are. Honestly, who strictly follows their religion to the point that they can't enjoy themselves?

Thou shall not show thy ankle or thou shall be Cast into the Lake of Fire with Dante!

Pavot

I think the thing being talked about here is not the sexualization of an ankle, but vanity. When it all comes down to it, shaving one's legs is just vanity. It serves no practical purpose. The one nun I knew in my life did not shave her legs, wear makeup, get her hair done, do anything but clip her nails short... It's all in the same realm.

The commercial is cute though.

u completely miss the point.

i'm not talking about whether there's a vow not to show 6" of ankle bone, or whether nuns should or shouldn't wear stockings under the habit.... the majority of nuns simply wear the collar and headscarf and the rest of their clothing is absolutely average and comparable to anyone else. i should imagine some wear halter tops and jeans to do the shopping and bikinis on the beach..however, those nuns who choose to wear full habits are doing so for a reason, and their choice to wear that should be accepted and not seen as an opportunity to sexualize them.

it's the bastardization of a religious symbol for the purpose of humour. (and that's what i mean about other religions' intolerance....ask Kurt Westergaard about that)

if you think that the producer of this advert did not think that he would illicit sexually orientated thoughts from men by this advert, ur more naive than i thought.

Min

The advertisement was directed toward women, not men. Men generally don't buy razors designed for women to shave their legs.
Generating speaking, sexually oriented thoughts from men, upon seeing 6" of nun-ankle, would do nothing to promote the sale of a razor for shaving a woman's legs...at least in my view. It might point to a certain demographic of fetishists, but that too has nothing to do with the sale of ladies razors.


...it might make certain men want to pick up a nun, but I see no advantage to the razor manufacturer in that!

That would be akin to a Gillette ad as seen on NASCAR races attempting to target women with sexual thoughts about NASCAR "young guns". Doesn't actually make much sense, since the ad is geared toward men who might be NASCAR fans and might buy a gillette razor based upon the commercial.


What this is is the exploitation of an archaic religious symbology which is largely non-existent, for the purpose of selling women razors.

You might ask a woman about that....

I am a woman, MID.

What practical purpose does shaving legs have?

u still don't get the issue, do u ? here's a clue : advertising producers play on hidden agendas and subliminal messaging.....



No one, not even me has said that the advert was not "intended" to sell razors... or commented on how effective it was or wasn't. ppl have just commented on whether it offends them or not, and only u have maintained that this ad is totally focussed on selling razors. The thread is NOT about selling razors, the thread is about whether or not the ad is offensive...


i would say it's more akin to the adverts of David Beckham in his Armani underpants appealing to women !!! or the ads of Beckham bare-chested and shaving, appealing to women !! who incidentally, buy their men razors... Or are you saying that u look at David Beckham ads and think only of underpants and not how big his bulge is ? lolol or do u really think ur g/f looks at the Beckham Armani ads and only thinks of underpants !!!


u are almost right here... it is the exploitation of a religious symbol which is largly non-existent, but for the purpose of getting men to get their women to buy a certain razor..

wake up and smell the houmous

Min

lol wicked add really nice one..... such a .beatiful girl to become a nun ... this was the only offense nothing else!

This is a man talking...


None.
You can go your whole life without shaving your legs. Probably won't hurt you a bit (in any physical way, at least).
However, it'll probably get you looked at in derogatory ways by society (society is that way, you know), what with hairly ankle bones and calves and thighs hanging out all over the place...

And, since much clothing for women is designed to be attractive, and expose their legs, one might think it would be rather uncomfortable to wear something like stockings with stubble hanging out all over the place. I can only imagine how that feels.

A guy can go his whole life without cutting his hair or shaving...or even trimming either. However, most of us don't do that...due to the discomfort, and due to the fact that we'd all look like Neanderthals if we did.

Being a man...with a beard...I can say that if you don't maintain it, keep it trimmed, etc., it can feel rather nasty on the face. Men shave their faces, or trim their beards. There's a reason for that! Is it practical? Sure it is. If ya feel crappy, that's enough reason.

I think women shave their legs for the same pragmatic reason.


Perhaps you think that a woman shaving her legs is vain.


Maybe she just feels better doing it. Maybe she thinks she looks better doing it. Whatever.
Does any of this matter?

I think the argument was about some religious degradation involved in using a young nun (an actress, mind you, not a nun--and that doesn't matter either, since most nuns expose their legs and shave them....doing otherwise would likely be seen as something unatractive to the nunnery!) who decided to expose her ankles in a marketing campaign by a razor manufacturer....not about the practical purpose of shaving one's legs in a society where probably 99.9% of women do.

This is a woman talking....

men all too often think that a woman shaving her legs is all about making sure hers stockings dont snag when she puts them on, but its more than that. a womans body is supposed to be a relatively hair-free zone except from her scalp which should have long flowing tresses.... in the same way that a man is supposed to have a barrel chest and a deep voice..... or a hairy face.

men feel less of a man if they have a pidgeon chest, bum fluff on their chins or a squeaky voice, and so women feel less feminine if they have hair on their legs.

Is that so hard to understand ?

the habit is worn specifically to hide the womans body from admiration by men... to shield her from lasciviousness and sexual desire of men and is a religious token to that end... this advert simply and completely circumvents that defense, and is offensive for that reason... in the same way that to remind a man his g-spot is to be found three inches up his a**h**e thus implying the course of action necessary to use it, is also offensive.

Min

ok I like shaving my legs and I dont find it offensive at all due to
A. Its summer time, and personally hairy legs on chicks...look odd, and like they dont care about themselves
B. Its too friggen hot out to not shave my legs...I feel better, and cooler when they are shaved.
c. I like feeling feminine, i'm a tomboy generally, but that doesn't mean I have to look like a guy, I can still be sexy and be comfortable.

honestly i'm getting so PO'ed with people getting offended over every little thing now in days, you don't like it don't look at it or change the channel, no one is holding a gun to your head. Deal with it.

I don't shave unless I have to. It takes too long and it's uncomfortable. It doesn't make me feel like less of a woman to not shave. I don't look gross so it's fine. No one sees anyway. I'll admit that it can be pretty sick to see chicks with manly amounts of leg hair. But you know what? It's natural. It's fine with me. I don't wear shoes or much makeup either, though. I still look purty.

so ur getting annoyed at ppl who get annoyed ?? does that make u one of the ppl who annoys u ?

maybe u shouldn't have joined a thread called "Is this an offensive ad ?" it's kind of a giveaway !!

Nope, it's not.
I do understand it, completely.

I think I implied as much...




Of course it is...or, it was...as pertains to the habit.
However, the admiration of a woman can come simply from listening to her speak, or from looking at her face...

Me thinks you are far too offended by nothing that couldn't be eliminated from consciousness by not watching TV...




Really? Offensive....? Unattractive to some I think, gives shivers to others...but distasteful? Then anything sexual is distasteful, and of course, for the many millions of men who have a doctor feeling up their bum to palpate their "g spots" routinely...I suppose the number would be reduced if it was actually distasteful.
It's actually called a prostate gland, and if you need 3" to find it, it's anatomically out of place....more like 1.5" to 2", max...
You might not talk about it in casual company, but the fact that many men submit to this implies that it's at least acceptible...to them.
And the fact is, few men, likely, need to be reminded about that stuff. Further, this has nothing to do with your reference to perception of offense in a bloody TV ad for a shaving razor.






Jesus...where are we going here...?

This is an ad for a shaving razor!





There you go!




I am sure you do look purty!

so why make rediculous statements like "you can go ur whole life without shaving ur legs" ? when u don't live in the social circles that the majority of women do these days. yes of course it's physically possible to not shave, as some women on here have said, but as u urself said, u do because it's uncomfortable not to and u look untidy. For women, there is another point on top of that , that men don't have to contend with in that some women DO feel less of a woman if they have hairy legs and in todays society the MAJORITY of women are looked at down noses if they have hairy legs.

Ah !! is see the problem now... ur expecting me to get ur implications, but u refuse to coment on my obvious statements.... like i posted on 2nd July...

yes, but the habit is made and worn to mininimise that exposure of flesh. As I said before, the advert is insulting to the Church and the Sisterhood by deliberately circumventing the meaning and use of the habit by allowing the exposure of part of a womans body. And furthermore, it sexualizes the Nun because she is "smoking hot !" (apparently..)

well, u will always think that whilst u believe that what i find offensive is womens shaven legs and NOT the bastardization of a religious symbol !!!

lol !!! u r clutching at straws here MID. u can't deflect the point i make by rambling on about the technicalities of the male 'G spot' and attempt to make me look stupid or uneducated by quoting some measurements and medical practices. u cant deflect my point by trying to say that "Anything sexual is distasteful" and u cant deflect the point by refering to some men this and some men that... it adds no credence to ur argument. I would very much like to see a straight man on here admit to being one of those men who is quite happy to have objects inserted up his anus for the purpose of sexual pleasure. Do u know anyone like that who is not Gay and would like to say so on here ? Now that i've asked, I expect someone to say they do.. but then, i think i've made it appear too convenient, so I probably wouldn't believe it anyway..

well, seeing as the OP was "Is this ad offensive ?" and to me it is, it will probably go on until ppl stop trying to convince me that insulting my religion should not offend me. The crux of the matter here is whether the ad is offensive or not. I am religious, but I am not perfect, but I should be allowed my own opinion and i'm bloody well going to have it. and another point i would like to make is : Would we still be having this conversation if the Nun in the advert was an 80 year old and not "smoking hot !!" ( as rebel put it).

i've reposted this one because u must have missed it....

If anything thinks that was offensive then they are just looking for reasons to find things offensive. The world has really turned into something crazy with all of the "that was offensive" or "stereotypes!" or "racist!" bs I think it is really getting out of control. People need to relax.

Was that sarcasm?

I disagree with u 110%. I am not 'looking' for reasons to find things offensive. i take things as i see them... i take things as they affect me. i take things as they appear and treat them accordingly. there are some things which can be argued effectively and some things which cant. there are just as many ppl in this world who let themselves be walked all over as there are ppl who do the walking. i'm not one of those, i stand up for myself and i stand up for others. in this instance, the Church is not here to defend the religious symbology of the habit, so i am here to do if... and woe betide anyone who goes against someone with dedicated belief.
please understand...to some ppl their religion is very important... to others their mother, for example, is the most important figure in their lives. if i were to insult ur mother LostInThought, would u think it ok to let me "get away with it ?" i certainly hope not !!

Min

No, not at all!

Why do I make "ridiculous comments like that?"

It's probably because of ridiculous queries like this:



As I said, no, it's not. I understand and have made the same points you have.
I think you're not hearing what's being said, and your ability to do so is blinded by some fervor regarding sacriledge...




You wish to dwell upon the bastardization of a "religious symbol", and accuse me not adressing that?



Aparently so...and despite the fact that I did address it...and you spent time not seeing that, but rather attacking me, in a way, and not seeing that I agree with the statements you made...

Let's get back to the real issue here!

I was merely trying to inject some rationality into the subject matter. The religious symbology inferred here is all but extinct. The commercial is perhaps worth a smile, at best. Perhaps it could be construed as "cute". Nothing more.


However, being offended by anything or anyone is a choice one makes. You choose to be offended by an ad. Seems harmless enough to me, but I'll completely accept your choice to be offended, and allow you your righteous indignation...be it directed toward me, or anyone else!

In your opinion, this ad is offensive. It defiles a religious symbology.
In my opinion, it's meaningless.

Isn't it a wonderful world?

Thanks.

I think it's a shame it took really agressive posting to get my message through. i'm thinking the type of exchange we had here is really the fault of advertising agencies who use such subtle methods for getting their products into the public psyche... simply gettting them talked about.

making fun of religion or anything / one else, be it 'just a smile' or even making something 'cute' that other people have made a life-choice about, is bound to cause at the very least distaste and as we seem to agree, distinct anger from some religions around the world.
....though i do believe that the greater part of the problem is that the 'jokers' do not take the other persons offence seriously...

a little thought before taking the 'p' would save a whole lot of trouble.. I don't think its too hard to do.

Min

I think the greater part of the problem, and the real shame, is that zealots read what they want and don't bother to address or even ackowledge the real issues brought forth...


It didn't take any agressive posting to get your message through. You took a great deal of offended effort to avoid the point. It was understood, if you bothered to read it.

You're right, a little thought, and consideration, before attacking, would be reasonable for some posters...

I made it clear. You misintertpreted it. That's all.

Some folks are offended. That seems nonsensical given the actual circumstances, but I accept that. It's somewhat nominal human behavior.
Sometimes, attempting to inject rationality into a situation which is essentially meaningless triggers a response which is...untoward, to say the least.

However, I am not am joker. I was born and raised a Catholic. I came to understand it for what it was, decades ago. You apparently have not. That's OK too...I can accept that.


p.s. This exchange is not possibly the fault of advertising agencies. I don't actually watch TV! I turn off commercials. This exchange is the fault of someone who was offended by my remarks without understanding them, and who decided to go on the offensive rather than understanding what was being said....

i am quite unlike some ppl, as i am quite happy for others to have their own opinion, however different it is to mine.
as i'm sure anyone will tell u, it takes two to have a disagreement... i was making points about the violation of a religious symbol, you were talking about women shaving their legs... hence it's obvious that it was my blunt questions that prompted u to reply to the points i raised, otherwise u would still be rattling on about women shaving their legs and not about the real issue under discussion. don't be upset that u took ur lead from a woman on this !!

and the reason i had to make the aggressive and direct posts is because u weren't at all clear..... the only thing u made clear was ur skill at being sarcastic, patronizing and evasive..... including this new attempt with the "poor me, i'm the attacked and offended one now" routine. firstly, it doesn't wash and secondly if u think that was me attacking u, u have no idea what my being angry with someone IS.

i think it is also very telling that u have chosen to continue this wrangling, apparently deliberately misunderstanding the meaning of my last post, which was not directed at u.. but at the makers of the advert... the jokers who think that they can say and do anything they like even to the extent of offending people and then hide behind their baseline "it's alright... it's just a bit of fun.."
a phrase in ur last post explains an awful lot more than most all of ur posts put together ever did !!
it appears to me that u have an alternate agenda in this discussion, and I see no use in going down that road. i am now drawing a line under this "discussion" and suggest that u do too.

Min

You suggest I do too, huh?







I thought I did...

But I am sure you'll want the last word...

Please, go right ahead.

i can see how it would be offensive 300 years ago lol but not now

Pretty much sums it up...

why ?