Lolita Titillates For Lee Jeans, Gets Away With It


Reverse Cowgirl sends us this titillating Lolita-like poster ad campaign (second image here and a motherlode here) for Lee jeans that was under the scrutiny of Australia's Advertising Standards Board after several people complained "the clothes can hardly be seen and "
this type of ad demeans women." True that but the Board did not rule against the ad saying, "The board (notes) that the woman is over 18, is fully clothed in attire that is fashionable amongst young women for summer, and that there is no nudity." True that too. Besides, a little fantasy never hurt anyone, right? Of course, some women will look at this ad and say, "I'm not dressing like that slut" while their boyfriend or husband at the same time begs them, "please, please dress like that slut for me!"

Written by Steve Hall    Comments (14)     File: Poster, Racy     Oct- 5-06  
Advertising Jobs

Enjoy what you've read? Subscribe to Adrants Daily and receive the daily contents of this site each day along with free whitepapers.

ad:tech Conference Headlines


I think Calvin Klein did this pretty much already, and it was just as ambiguously worthless then.

Posted by: Ben Thoma on October 5, 2006 01:46 PM

The Gal is of age and the target audience is a bullseye. Lee's Fiscal Year: Nov 1 - Oct 31. Remember, almost the entire annual budget of Lee's is spent in the fall, especially strong during the “Back To School” weeks.
Lee zero's in on "peer influencers" within its designated age group (17-22) and uses a full compliment of email, direct mail viral posts, banners, print and other digital venues. Thank you for sharing this and the link to Duet's other smile bringers. Rock ON Steve!

Posted by: arthur on October 5, 2006 01:48 PM

Just to note, photog is bad boy Terry Richardson

Posted by: Adam Pollock on October 5, 2006 03:30 PM

I don't know who Terry Richarson is, but I now officially hate him. Lucky bastards. I hATe HIm!

Posted by: daveednyc on October 5, 2006 04:59 PM

"fashionable amongst young women for summer," ???!!!

Guess I'm hanging out at the wrong places! (Well, being a late 30s, married dad of 3, guess I shouldn't be hanging out in those kinds of places, afterall.)

I'm surprised no one has pointed out the interesting placement of the Lee logo. (BTW, arrived her by way of

Seriously, sex may draw our attention, but legally, it doesn't sell. Just gets attention.


Posted by: Mike Driehorst on October 6, 2006 08:53 AM

Sex sells.
Advertising 101. Chapter 1. Paragraph 1. First Sentence.

Posted by: Martin Calle on October 6, 2006 12:02 PM

It also doesn't work.
Any research study on the topic.

Posted by: Steve Hall on October 6, 2006 12:12 PM

more spec. enough with the student books Ad Rants. got any real work to showcase?

Posted by: steve on October 6, 2006 03:55 PM

Not spec. This is an actual campaign.

Posted by: Steve Hall on October 6, 2006 03:59 PM

"please, please dress like that slut for me!"

oh, come on, I would dress like that for a "love" of mine and then later he would just look at Asian chicks.

Lots of people (men or women) just want to try something different than what they have. It's easy to look through an innocent magazine and get it with the help of an imagination. If that imagination had any lasting effect, the product placement within might stick in the head. Then it's not sex that sells. It's the freedom of association.

Posted by: HUH? on October 6, 2006 10:00 PM

Furthermore, for people that have seen that ad, it most likely has a greater effect of candy sales at halloween. People who run out for candy at the last minute, may just be buying more tootsie rolls.

Posted by: HUH? on October 6, 2006 10:10 PM

sorry, correction for guys: toosie pops.

(Phew! You can probably guess my orientation. How embarassing.)

Posted by: HUH? on October 6, 2006 10:12 PM

Let's be honest here.

The problem (per se) with this ad is that there's nipple showing.

Unless my brain is just filling in aereolas where none exist, which it has been known to do.

Posted by: dutycalls on October 8, 2006 06:12 PM

That comment made me go back to my albums and protective sleeves that picture men with tight pants where, with even the faintest imagination, I can fill in the shadows. Then and Now.

Oh, thank heavens, for the fashions of the late seventies. It helped me with white definition photography. Making the picture POP!

Posted by: HUH? on October 9, 2006 08:51 AM

Post a comment