Sexy Chain-Linked Legs Supposed to Stop Sex Trafficking


Is it wrong to think this Amnesty International sex trafficking ad is just a tiny bit hot while at the same time realizing it's a clever representation of a reprehensible practice? Please! Don't confuse. It's like those ads where young girls with huge boobs are used to convince you underage sex is a bad thing while making you want to have sex at the same time. (Not with the underage girls in the ads, mind you. Contrary to popular belief, even I know the difference between right and wrong.)

The ad, created by Switzerland's Walker, does catch the eye and that's half the battle in this game. But like the underage sex ads, it creates an uncomfortable awkwardness. Maybe that's a good thing. Perhaps it causes one to feel a bit skeeved. Trouble is, the people who engage in this reprehensible practice, after seeing the ad, may simply be more motivated to find the next young, hot thing to trade like a piece of property.

by Steve Hall    Apr-23-08   Click to Comment   
Topic: Bad, Creative Commentary, Good, Magazine, Opinion, Racy, Strange   

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



You're commenting on a ghost, Steve. Why would you waste precious time in your life commenting on something nobody has ever seen or will ever see? I'll give you $1000 if someone can prove mass media where it ran.

Bamboozled again!

Posted by: Mike on April 23, 2008 11:06 AM

Had an argument with Benj the other day about whether sex trafficking is OK if the girls who volunteer for "career placement" understand there is a "reasonable risk" they might, in fact, be trafficked for sex. Rendered inconclusive. He would make a good lawyer.

Posted by: Angela on April 23, 2008 11:32 AM

Dude, if the photography were better, it would look like any one of the ads in Vogue/Elle/etc. Personally, I would have liked to see more leg.

That being my first reaction, I'ma have to say that the ad does, indeed, suck.

Posted by: Jolie on April 23, 2008 1:29 PM

ACtually, good question. 99 percent of the women trafficked DO know what they are getting into, they know exactly that they were not going to NAME THE COUNTRY to be a waitress or a nanny or a dog walker. They know exactly that they will be servicing men in the ejaculation industries of the world, and that the money is good, and much of the time, the women's parents SOLD THEM to traffickers to pay off debts or buy a house in Vietnam of Bulgaria or Malaysia or Taiwan or Russia.

They all know what they are getting into. ThEY DO NOT ALL want to be doing this, but circumstances of either parents selling them or the need for money or the desire to escape from poverty or abuse back home, dictates that they wil be working in the dick business. It's sad, yes, but they all know what they are getting into. They are not bad girls, many have hearts of gold, but they are unlucky girls, born on the wrong side of the tracks of the IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHICH FAMILY YOU WERE BORN INTO CITY. Sigh.

I know many of these girls. They are good people. But they did not get hookwinked. They all knew exactly what they were being sent out to do, and that did it because of parental pressure, boyfriend presssure or mafia pressure, but they all agreed to do it.

Posted by: david astero on April 23, 2008 9:14 PM

I think your reaction suggests it's a strong charity piece. It made you worry that more sex-trafficking might be motivated.
It made you think about the issue. Unless you've started thinking about how an issue makes you feel, you're unlikely to donate to the cause. You need to be engaged.
There are very different rules when your product (not just its essence) is intangible.
And the charity "product" does tend to be intangible.

Posted by: guy bingley on April 24, 2008 1:34 PM