Things are getting out of control!!!!

vwc228 · Post #1 » by **vwc228** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 2:56 pm

I don't know if you guys saw these but here are the new Nike ad for a basketball shoe. Nike is being accused of releasing homophobic ads. Check out the mostly negative comments on the ads on the website of Nike's advertising campaign.

http://wkstudio.typepad.com/studio/2008 ... print.html

This is just a bit too much. There is nothing homophobic about these. Eitherway, Nike was forced to pull the ads. What you guys think?

Post #2 » by **dflash3** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:09 pm

What the hell??!!! Is this some kind of joke? How in the hell is this ad homophobic? First thing that entered my mind was some guy getting dunked on and the very last thing that would enter my mind is that its homophobic.

I read the comments and I still don't see it unless the guys getting dunked on are gay.

TrueRain · Post #3 » by **TrueRain** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:09 pm

I don't get it. So now you can't dunk on someone because it would appear offensive and homophobic?

Rasho Brezec · Post #4 » by **Rasho Brezec** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:11 pm

What's next? Is NBA going to ban posterizing dunks?

lethalweapon3 · Post #5 » by **lethalweapon3** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:28 pm

I don't think Nike was "forced", but recognized the publicity from yanking the ads was wayyy better than sticking their ground on this. Made everybody who hadn't seen the ads (and thus, the new sneakers) go online to see what the fuss was about.

As you saw from the marketing company's blog, the ads had been out there for well over a month (and was in hoop mags like SLAM even longer than that) and no one said anything. Then they plastered them on billboards at NYC subways and playgrounds and now the howls from bloggers (note the peace 'n quiet until July 22, after one pro-GLBT blogger wrote about it, then about 100 messages within the span of two hours.)

It's not 'phobic as the action pictured has nothing to do with an act of sexuality (note the people ARE wearing clothes) and everything to do with basketball. Two guys kissing with "That Ain't Right" would be 'phobic, or a man getting beaten down for making advances with "Punks Jump Up" would be 'phobia on a Fred Phelps level. Assuming the scenes shown in the shots were homophobic requires falsely preconceiving the sexual interests of the acting players participating in the scenes. W+K could have done a little homework to recognize the "Punks Jump Up" comment wouldn't go over well, but the others were fine.

Bought the black Hyperdunks on Saturday and they're certified dope (Although my wallet now needs a "Recovery Center!") Very light and (at least for the moment) seemingly durable. You won't see me hurdling Aston Martins anytime soon in these, though.

Hope the Recovery Center (877-DUNKD-ON) ads keep coming though.

~lw3

Don Draper · Post #6 » by **Don Draper** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:30 pm

How is that homophobic? Censorship is so trendy nowadays.

Teddy KGB · Post #7 » by **Teddy KGB** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:33 pm

wtf how are these homophobic. What is with the pussification of America :nonono:

Los Manos · Post #8 » by **Los Manos** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:34 pm

I would contest that the only people who could possibly be offended by the ads are in fact homophobic.

DMannOC · Post #9 » by **DMannOC** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:45 pm

I think it's quite obvious that it's homophobic because only a homophobic person would not enjoy someones testicles in their face. :roll:

sarah42 · Post #10 » by **sarah42** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:00 pm

i find that some of the white gays - or "white queens" as some of the users on black blogs are saying - are the ones making a big deal about it on mostly white blogs. the people commenting on the black blogs seems to get the fact that getting dunked on in the worst way is the ultimate diss - like when lebron dunked on kg in the semis or when kg dunked on pau in the finals- its brings a statement especially if it seals the game for you. the only way you don't get getting dunked on is a total embarrassment is if you don't watch a lick of sports - and sadly this just reinforces the stereotype that gays don't watch sports - i hate it when gay blogs pick on one thing and every little gay out there almost in brainwashed mass follows it - i mean have a brain of your own - not everything needs to be made an issue or ppl will start to think you are crying wolf. i love my gays but GLAAD and organizations like it are so pathetic with some of their racist ******* - grow the eff up is what i say!

Don Draper · Post #11 » by **Don Draper** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:02 pm

Stuart Scott must be homophobic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoUNS_Sgbxs&feature=related

theTHIEF · Post #12 » by **theTHIEF** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:06 pm

I have been doing that since high school, remember it's important to yell "nuuutttss!" when you jump over someone like that...

TrueRain · Post #13 » by **TrueRain** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:07 pm

Vince Carter is homophobic.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xp6qJ7LZNlg

Oh yeah, he should also have his gold medal taken away from him because of this act of hate.

Mr Smoke Weed · Post #14 » by **Mr Smoke Weed** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:11 pm

unless the billboards said
"now you're a ****" or something similar i dont see the homophobia

Neb · Post #15 » by **Neb** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:14 pm

These "black blogs" are awesome. Please, post more of their wisdom. White queens, not that's rich.

lethalweapon3 · Post #16 » by **lethalweapon3** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 6:55 pm

One of the flaws in the thread of arguments from critics is that the player is somehow "being forced" into contact with the other player, and that Nike is suggesting that the contact in and of itself is wrong.

First, there's NO sexually-oriented activity occuring in the ads which Nike is declaring is "wrong." I've never seen sexually-oriented activity that involved being fully clad in street clothes, but maybe I need to get out more. Again, there's nothing in the ad that suggests who the players sleep with when they leave the court. The "punks" jumping up can be straight or gay... nobody cares.

Nevertheless, if one still cares to go so far as to suggest some sexual connotation, the "being forced" factor ain't it. The defender has options in lieu of getting posterized for all eternity, including getting the **** outta the way, blocking the dunk, or fouling hard to keep the dunk from happening. The defender is, in no circumstance, under the basket against his will. The depictions are of two "consenting persons" playing hoops, with one caught in a momentarily embarrassing split-second position as a result. If someone sees sexuality out of this content they're thinking of the Bubba-in-the-prison-cell type of sex, where someone is being unduly "forced upon." THAT's neither gay nor str8 but sexual assault, which "Ain't Right" no matter who's involved.

The ads are intended to illustrate humiliation, sure. But the perspective can also be of a defensive player nobly (albeit foolishly) trying to draw the charge on behalf of his squad. Freddy Weis was trying to do just that in Sydney in 2000. Ironically, the result of that decision produced million$ for a company that previously struggled to convince people that Nike Shox were cool and practical.

Since then, players getting dunked over badly has appeared in TV ads for years. Just this year alone, check out the end of Dick's Sporting Goods' "You've Paid Enough Already" spot, the opening of the Southwest Airlines commercial (wanna get away?) and active NBA players like Paul Davis getting paid to get crowned by the Gatorade-hawing Dwyane Wade. The "Don't Get Embarrassed; Buy Our Stuff!" angle has worked in marketing for years, and will continue to because it works. Nike parodying its own consumers with the Mars Blackmon "It's Gotta Be the Shoes!" commercials wound up being a huge success for the eventual Jordan brand.

If you're looking closely, you'll note also that the so-called humbled defenders are ALSO donning Nike apparel (just not the Hyperdunks, apparently). Nike didn't even take a chance at calling out competitors with these ads, nor were they concerned about some sexually-oriented connotation of the players wearing their product.

Another irony... back in the 90's there was a certain about-to-be-washed-up white rapper who contributed to these very same billboard locations in NYC. And it were these very same "Friends of Dorothy" who leapt to the rescue of Calvin Klein ("It's Artistic!" they'd say) against millions of folks insisting these ads were boorish and dehumanizing of men while degrading to women. They not only saved the ads and salvaged this punk's career (sorry, Marky), they wound up making a friggin cottage industry out of what was nothing more than some white cotton drawz. Now, many of the same morality police beating up Nike are rocking Calvin's name on their waistbands as they type.

These folks are likely more appalled by the immature reactions among TRULY homophobic people on the subways, streets and on websites to the ads: "If someone tried putting their **** in my face like that I'd (insert violent reaction)." That's not the fault of some sneaker company. The protesters should be confronting these people about their behaviors, instead of attacking the depiction of a common and popular occurence in basketball.

~lw3

sarah42 · Post #17 » by **sarah42** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 7:47 pm

Neb wrote:These "black blogs" are awesome. Please, post more of their wisdom. White queens, not that's rich.

oh i'm sorry did i offend you and your rich sensibilities? don't worry your pretty little head about those black blogs - just visit those white ones - they inspire sooooooooo much! :roll:

don't you just love the wisdom on towleroad? makes me want to save the world! if you didn't already know there is an obvious rift between whites and blacks in the gay community. apparently "white queens" is a term used by some blacks but some whites in turn use the N word - so even?

theTHIEF · Post #18 » by **theTHIEF** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 7:48 pm

so yea...this isnt going anywhere...