Tom Ford: why don't you want to see male full-frontal?
by Josh Loposer (Subscribe to Josh Loposer's posts), Posted Jun 5th 2008 at 4:00PMThis is a post
Filed under: News
.jpg)
Tom Ford is certainly not the first designer to try to blur the line between porn and fashion advertising -- not by a long shot. But, unlike many others, Ford seems to think his scandalous ads filled with soft-core and Eyes Wide Shut-esque scenes are above reproach. To be specific, Ford feels that he's battling against an unfair double standard -- he says that when it comes to fashion photography, male nudity is getting the shaft.
Penises! There, I said it. Tom Ford wants to showcase the one-eyed trouser snake to help him sell suits, eyewear, and a bunch of other non-penis related fashion items. Ford's latest campaign features his raciest set of ads yet, partly because they feature full-frontal male nudity. Accompanying the new campaign, he penned an essay in this month's GQ Style where he outlined his passionate quest to force the public accept the presence of artfully-lit dongs in fashion advertising.
A funny thing happened to his essay -- when he picked up a copy to read it -- GQ Style had placed blocks of text in front the penises in the accompanying photos! Ha! We have a couple of good ideas as to why male junk isn't popular in most advertising: not that many people want to see it.
There is a double standard at work here -- and it's that men want to see naked women, while women are not offended by the sight of female nudity. On the other hand, women don't seem to care nearly as much about glimpsing a dude's package, while many men are totally offended at the sight of male nudity. Case closed.
When you attempt to blur the line with fashion and porn, that means you're subject to the demand for porn -- which is almost completely male-dominated. Plus, controversy might be good for advertisers, but it's not always the best thing for magazines who depend on subscribers for a portion of their revenue.
Anna 6-08-2008 @ 1:20AM
That's trashy...
Who is going to even be looking at the FASHION part of these pictures? They could have made the whole thing a lot more tasteful and a lot less tacky.
Reply
Martin Brant 6-08-2008 @ 10:35PM
I for one applaud Ford's quest. I'm a writer and I believe, when you're portraying people's lives, nudity plays a role in illustrating the character's presence of mind. It's time people come to terms with the human body, both male and female. I'll never figure out why moral and religious stigmas have been attached to nudity, when the body is one of nature's most exquisite creations. Perhaps, since so many people are out of shape today, they don't want to see pictures of what they should look like. Call me a proponent of the human body.
Reply
Heather 6-11-2008 @ 12:07AM
It's not JUST the fact that there is full frontal nudity in these ads that makes them inappropriate, it's the fact that they are basically porn with some clothes thrown in. It's just tacky, tasteless trash to me. I would rather see two naked people standing there side-by-side, instead of seeing a woman straddle a man while he grabs her breasts in a typical porn pose. Personally, I would rather NOT see nudity in advertisement but, EVERYTHING can't be perfect now can it.
Keep the nudity where it belongs, behind closed doors.
Reply
Emma Leigh 6-11-2008 @ 5:12PM
What I don't get is this. Tom Ford wants to sell his products, correct? In the Park Bench photo the couple are getting all the attention. Does anyone even notice the guy in the tuxedo? I presume he is the one actually wearing the merchandise. The photo gets a lot of attention, but no one is going to remember what the product was, IMO.
Personally, I am beginning to believe that Ford has a need to act out sexually and uses his position as a prominent designer to fulfill his exhibitionism.
Reply