Too Sexy for Times Square

I think the stink is the hand reaching in\by the privates area(boy toy)

Believe it or not Bella I think it's totally fine, as far as what the advertisement is for, jeans.

Do you think it's the dress, or the hand around the leg?

It's the hand so close to the boys...thingy....

I was gonna ask what was being sold (ahem), but someone said it was jeans. Too subtle for me, I guess...

LOL! Nothing wrong with it sfar as I am concerned. You dont actually see anything you're not supposed to see; it all just plays on what we know there to be.

In general, the only reasons I can think of why one would want to ban all too sexy billboards is a) because of children seeing it or b) the picture being demeaning of either sex.

In this case, a) doesnt apply because children whom you're shielding from knowing about sex wont find out anything more from this: only those already mature enough to be in the know will recognize whats going on.

As for b), this is actually a pretty exemplary ad: man and woman are both taking and being taken, both acting and surrendering. In all its admirable dexterousness (that must have been a pretty difficult pose to hold!) its actually a perfect representation of a dynamic, yet equal relationship. Not stultified equal as in, oh-my-god noone should be allowed to be dominating but equal as in, changing/interchanging roles.

Cool how they're both equally (each other's) lust object. Just like in real life, really (if you're in a good relationship) - but not much like in most ads, at all, unfortunately.

Actually a pretty progressive ad, come to think of it. Good sign for our times. Kind of a pity they took it off.

(Me, overanalyse?)

I wonder if they would have taken an ad off that had a man laying his hand on a womans leg more or less at that place. Is such directness more offensive when done by a woman?

(Still overanalysing. Hey, my mum was a feminist.)

It's a work of art, all right.

What's funny to me is that when I was a lad, Times Square was the place to go for all sort of naughtiness: movies, magazine shops, and lots of things I was too naive to know about at the time. Now it's gone the Disney route, so something as insipid as this is seen as inappropriate....

Dude, like, she's grabbing his junk, dude.

Dude.

also, i think theyre kinda sexy

pity about the kitschy background...

You really think a girl like that is going to have a whole arm tatoo?

O damn i didnt even see the tat! There u go, my mind must have been distracted

I dont like that at all ... (the big tats, i mean). Not - at -all. Dont know what is up with that.

You ever checked out the suicidegirls website (adult content)? Some cool girls - but all those tats! Big ones, I mean. I guess its really the hip thing ... such a waste. (Then again arm is better than breast/front ... big tats on front are really a waste.)

Has she been to a foot binder?

I just can't get past the shoes.

Especially her flesh colored pointy shoes.

I like the photo otherwise, I don't find it at all offensive.

But really, they should have been barefoot.

Hi all, my first thought was it seems tame for Time Square,
but D'artagnan is right--it is much more Disney these days.
Keep thinking of those Calvin Klein underwear model boy toys, with their "junk" pretty much on display--for all the world to see. Which I guess means either our society is in a phase or regressing from having sexual components in our advertisements? I don't really think so--there still seems to be a large use of sexual images, in a number of contexts; I am probably desensitized to a point now--so it would really take a lot to offend me. Perhaps more conservative indivuals would be offended because as other members have described--it's both the man and the woman being sexual in this ad--and this is more offensive to people than just a body image?

Tell those kids to eat some pasta.........!!

I believe that the medical term is "bathing suit area."

Fewer people would get tatoos if they could see themselves in 20 (maybe 30) years. Not only do they droop with the skin, but they just start to look faded and dirty. That cut little rosebud on a woman's breast turns into a long stemmed rose as the years go by. I once saw an elderly man with what looked like a big, saggy bruise on his upper arm. On a little closer look I realized it was an old military tatoo of a big battleship.

I lived around Times Sq in the early 80's (temporary NYU housing) and this would have been tame by the signage of that era.

Man, I've seen way worse than that in the lobby of family hotels in Reno! Seems pretty tame to me, and I'm prudish.

Nevermind, I looked again and noticed his terrifying skeletal ribs and hips-- eeeek! That is offensive after all.