Free publicity? You think thejournal.ie isn’t being paid to seed these arguments with related stories?

I would be nearly certain that the Journal was not paid to feature this story (if that was your question).

I can confirm we were not paid to feature this story. We featured it because the previous story we ran was very popular with readers.

There you have it. Straight from the horses mouth!

Wherever you have hot babes like this, you will always have envious ugly feminists not far behind.. Sure isnt that why they became feminists in the first place? Cos they were ugly? And envious of the hot babes? Tell the truth!! Cmon now….

Or jersey

Don’t even think these particular ads are sending the wrong message to young girls. they’re fairly obviously tongue in cheek. I think it’s the more subtle stuff parents of young girls need to worry about.

I noticed that too…. it kind of looks like they’re upside down.

I was about to say, where can I get me some of that underware? …but I just looked back at the picture, and you’re right – they look weird!!
Maybe, only explination I can think of anyway, she’s running, without a proper sports bra, and they’re on the up-bounce as the picture is taken.

Spot on!!

You don’t play sport for "perks" or the adulation of the crowd. It’s really all irrelevant anyway. Its an ad and people are talking about hunky dorys. Don Draper’s job is done!

Still owned and produced by the same man…Ray Coyle.. The King of Crisps!!

Do you not think camogie players are in the GAA? duh!

They aren’t. They have a special relationship but have their own governing body that is wholly independent, albeit fiscally supported by, the GAA. Hence the difference between GAA, the governing body of Hurling, Men’s Gaelic Football and Handball, and the term Gaelic Games which encompasses these and the Camogie Association and Cumman Peil na mBan.

If it’s funded by the GAA I don’t think saying it’s part of the GAA is that far off, though pedantically speaking I’m sure you’re right.

Do you not think camogie players commenting on it is more relevant though? Just ignoring this blatant sexism and total disregard for women’s sport would be wrong – I don’t really care if some eejits buy more crisps off the back of it. I’m more concerned that someone speaks out about it and doesn’t let it go unchallenged even if everyone here, shamefully including the women, think it’s all perfectly ok and treating women’s sport as a bit of a laugh that’s only interesting if good looking scantily clad women are playing it is fine too.

I’ll deal with your main point first. This campaign’s success or failure rests on its ability to draw complaints from those running Gaelic Games, it wants to be seen as controversial and that’s why they use the line “Proud Supporters of Gaelic Football”. Cumann Peil na mBan and the GAA have, so far, remained tight-lipped as any response that fuels the fire helps Largo Foods so the best course of action is to rise above it and not engage. O’Flynn’s response effectively helps Largo as it keeps the fire burning longer (this is the 92nd comment on this thread for example). The inaction of the GAA and Cumann Peil na mBan has however kept this story to a much lower profile than when the IRFU decided to respond to Largo’s actions last year http://action81.com/blog/?p=1760

Regarding the issue of separation. I made that point because your wonderfully illustrative argument of “duh!” seemed merit some response as the point here is that there are 3 independent power structures here, and they are independent in terms of decision making, meaning 3 different places from which Largo can hope for a response to come. One made clear it wasn’t talking, another didn’t even say that much, but the third bit.

Sorry that was the 82nd not 92nd.

So because something has always been done you suggest that it should never be questioned and should continue to be done? There is also a major difference between the Special K ad and the Hunky Dory ad: the Special K ad suggests by eating their product and adhering to a balanced diet anyone can attain the figure of the woman in the ad. The Hunky Dory ad does not suggest this. It simply reads “Eat our food. Oh, and by the way, here’s a few scantily clad women for you men so you can take your trousers off and….”

I would definitely have more of a problem with the likes of the special k as than these ads. And the worst (or the best if you’re the advertiser) I think is the "cla booster" tv ad with the girl trying on jeans that give her a muffin top. That as makes me want to starve myself. The hunky dories ads just make me smile/laugh.

I never said I agreed with the Special K ad though either. I simply pointed out that there is a large difference between what the ads suggested.

The wonderbra adds were about the bra and what they can do for boobs, they made sense, the same with the ads for showergels. This ad the same as the last one, is stupid and not related to the product at all.

They’re gorgeous!

Don’t think they’re exactly revitalizing the sport…

It’s purely for the controversy, and as someone said above – free advertising for hunky dories

They are certainly giving it publicity along side the crisp brand name – that is plus to me.
I’ve already stated “For sure Hunky Dory is in it for themselves too ” and why not! They are a business employing further people, which in turn partly puts food on the bale of many workers families.
…And lets not forget we are talking about crisps here, not a company selling arms, underwear that exploits kids too young or drink or drugs!

So oldies that are complaining, get a bit of perspective and a bit of kop-on!

* bale = table – typo error.

Well these ads haven’t made me want to watch the galic any more than they’ve made me want to eat crisps

Well thats you – you shouldn’t automatically think that your non-interference is automatically applicable and/or the same same as everyone else.

CORRECTION: Well thats you – you shouldn’t automatically think that your non-INDIFFERENCE is automatically applicable and/or the same same as everyone else.

Oh calm down, if you look at any of the rest of my posts on this, you’ll sear I have no problem with these ads.. I see them as tongue in cheek, poking a bit of fun. I don’t think they’re exploiting women, setting a bad example for young girls, disrespecting the sport or any of that cr@p some others seem to think, I just don’t think like you do that they’re particularly doing anything positive for the GAA, not that they’re doing anything negative either. They also don’t make me want to eat crisps, but they are getting purple talking about the brand, so in that way, the ads are effective.

^ see, not sear, and people, not purple. Apologies for the swype typos

If any gaa club wanted to make any money all they have to do is make a calendar simples :)

Dunno, wouldn’t fancy seeing some camogie players in these kits! ;-p

If the GAA want to fill their stadiums then they need to drop their ridiculously high priced tickets.

Although, like Martina said, a calendar is not a bad idea…

Exactly, Dannymcgee. The ads are fine. Harmless fun & the models themselves have no probs. They said so themselves the last time. This is just scrapping the bottom of the barrel to drag out a story very few are bothered with. Move on -

An “own goal” by Ms. O’Flynn, methinks!!

How you can think that young girls are being victimised by this ad is beyond me. It’s a stupid ad that makes a parody of other sexy ads by being knowingly overt. I don’t think young girls are anywhere near as stupid as to think that this ad sets standards of appearances that they should be aiming at.

The societal pressure with regards to appearance on young girls largely comes from their own gender. Women always seem to say that they don’t dress up for men – they say they dress up impress/compete with other women.

And just because young men don’t fall for the appearance pressure, as much as young women, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist (you don’t get thousands of young men screaming at good looking young women in Croke Park – Take That, Justing Bienber etc.).

It also doesn’t mean that there aren’t other just as onerous societal pressures on young men with regard to masculinity, performance at sport and so on.

Is it not true that most examinations of general levels of happiness, sense of self-worth and so on always find that young women are doing far better than young men? Ever ask yourself why this is so? Or why is it that far more young men kill themselves than young women?

It’s not just this ad Donal. This ad was created by a company governed by men and advertised on media governed by men, aimed at a male audience. The vast majority of the print, radio and television media are owned by men. It is these men who set the agenda. Most people, and I will include myself in this, simply take the easy option when faced with a task – i.e. look at what has been done in the past and try to emulate, or better still, improve on what has already been done. This doesn’t make it right though. This ad doesn’t directly victimise young girls – but it is part of an entire cadre of ads that collectively do in the sense that they remove the free will, albeit surreptitiously, of the young girls who view such ads, promotional material, etc. Women are all to often told the only way to succeed in life is to have the perfect figure, the perfect looks. Men are simply told they have to be smart and intelligent, but that’s not enough for women. Even take a look at Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF. A very intelligent woman who has built a very successful career based on her intelligence and business savvy. Straight after becoming IMF head she was subjected to criticism and acclaim based on her sex appeal. This does not happen with men. Men may have the odd “and sure he’s also sexy” thrown at them – but it’s never one of the primary concerns facing them. It is for women. You say the societal pressures comes from their own gender – to a point yes it does. But ultimately it comes from men who dictate the very media that women then use themselves to further pressurise each other. Humans are not very smart creatures at the end of the day. We give ourselves too much credit. The only reason us men don’t do it to ourselves is because we control what the women see, hear, read, etc. to an astonishing degree. Take a look at Italy. Serious advances were made in women’s rights during the 1960s and 70s to a point where they had almost achieved equal respect with men. Along comes Berlusconi and his media empire, shovelling images of scantily clad women all over the TV, on billboards, etc. in the EXACT same fashion as Hunky Dorys did and what do you know – Italy is now one of the most sexist countries in Europe. All the work of the 60s and 70s is gone with women now seeing their looks as more important than their intelligence or personality. And this was done by only one man. Now imagine all those magazines, TV channels, advertising agencies and companies, over 80% of which are male owned. Take a look at China where the same pressure is being exerted on women. Young girls are mutilating themselves to look like a stereotypically good-looking western woman, and are going to such extremes as leg extensions (breaking the shin and inserting a metal implant to grow the legs), eye surgery to remove the “oriental” look, etc. In India they are bleaching their skin and avoiding sunlight at all costs (with serious health repercussions including a growing number of Vitamin D deficiencies among the middle classes). Even in the US (a country which actively discourages promiscuity through its churches while next door to the church are ads promoting Playboy and Hustler on giant billboards with women literally only using their hands to cover up) a recent study showed that there has been a serious decline in women seeking to advance themselves academically while another study reported a majority of women deem good looks and the right figure more important than a career. The Hunky Dory ad on its own doesn’t do much damage, but as part of an overall area of concern there is a major problem with it.

“And just because young men don’t fall for the appearance pressure, as much as young women, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist” – I never said it didn’t exist. I said there is very little societal pressure. Currently, with the likes of the cosmetic industries in particular, we are seeing that slowly change. You say there are onerous societal pressures on men regarding masculinity and so on. I agree there are. But placing societal pressures on women does not combat the societal pressures on men.

“Is it not true that most examinations of general levels of happiness, sense of self-worth and so on always find that young women are doing far better than young men?” These examinations are inconclusive and circular. The questions being asked are being asked by the very society that places the societal pressures on them.

“Or why is it that far more young men kill themselves than young women?” This is another topic which also needs addressing (and which has much to do with masculinity, employment, bullying, sense of self worth, etc.). But saying that we should all “take a chill pill” and by that logic do nothing about any problems in society is not the answer.

Brian – you clearly said that the societal pressures on men were lower than those on women. This is a subjective opinion not supported by evidence. In any case, a who is worse off debate serves no-one any good in the end.

Furthermore, my memory tells me that the original offending HD ad was made by a female creative.

The idea that men dictate and control the media that women consume (which is what you seem to be saying) is not something that I could agree with at all – consumer demand dictates how this media operates.

The magazine for women that didn’t have the articles on getting ready for the beach etc. simply would not sell.

My God Donal – you can’t even read what I wrote, and can’t obviously remember what you yourself wrote. First off I stated “There is very little societal pressure on men”. You went on then to suggest that I had stated that ” it doesn’t exist”. I then countered and repeated that there is “very little societal pressure” to which you responded by saying I clearly said it was lower. Well done. I don’t disagree with that last one. But why you had to suggest I said something I didn’t in the first place and then argue over it is beyond me. Regarding the differences in societal pressures – well try reading Kate Fox (1997), Haeberle (1981), and Powell and Kahn (2002) for a start.

“Furthermore, my memory tells me that the original offending HD ad was made by a female creative.” And who does she work for? Many slaves also opposed emancipation and worked for its preservation with blacks fighting for the Confederacy in the US Civil War. The Roman Catholic Church colluded with the UK government in the early 1800s despite the fact that Catholics were actively discriminated against. Your point is moot.

“The idea that men dictate and control the media that women consume (which is what you seem to be saying) is not something that I could agree with at all – consumer demand dictates how this media operates.” This is definitely not true, and if you believe it is consumer demand that dictates the media then you are very naive. Try the documentary Killing Us Softly 3: Advertising’s Image of Women or read Kaufman (2004) or Moser (2007).

“The magazine for women that didn’t have the articles on getting ready for the beach etc. simply would not sell.” There is a big difference in advising someone on how to get ready for the beach on one hand and on the other telling them they must be a size 8, they must have this year’s bikini, they must have appropriate sun tan lotion, make-up, hairspray and other toxic chemicals on their bodies, they must shave every single bit of hair, and as a result have to cake themselves in all sorts of deodorants and perfumes…and all for the beach!!

I see boobies.

Yawn…

I’d eat crisps out of …..
Y

oprah was fat brian , and she is by far the richest woman in show biz, merkel from germany is another example.

brian there is a site called gussy on facebook i think u would like it.

Ironically for the people using it as an example, its memorability highlights how little men are …… … oh there I go with my feminism and double standards!

Don’t look like any of the women in my area. I think the ones near me are affected by McDonalds adds. Brian is quoting the classical sociological and feminist arguments…always endearing to the fair sex. Women are not stupid , this is just fun.

Correct, sure2bsure. Just fun & not to b taken seriously. Get over it & move on folks. PLEASE.

Aye, fill that in – then go out and get a life!

I want to complain. There’s not enough of them.